United Slates
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Ml 48105
EPA-460/3-80-001
February 1980
Air
Cost Estimations for
Emission Control Related
Components/Systems and
Cost Methodology Description
Heavy Duty Trucks
NATIONAL TECHNICAL
INFORMATION SERVICE
U.S. DEPASWm Of COMMi»«
SPBINJFIEIO, U, 22161
-------
TECHNICAL
(Fltett rtad liujruerions an
REPORT DATA
the rrrtm btfort committing)
1. BEPOHT NO.
EPA 460/3-78-002
3. ncCIPItNT-S ACCESSION-NO.
PB8I mso t
j. TITU€ *.\O SUBTITLE
Cost Estimations for
Emission Control Related Components/Sys
and Cose Methodology Description
7. AuTMOHlSI
8. REPORT DATE
December 1977
terns
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
LeRoy H. Lindgren
8. PERFORMING ONGANIZATION REPORT NC
Contract 0PO-7Q2-3S48
RFP 0UA-77-B271
9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Rath & Strong, Inc.
21 Worthen Road
Lexington, Massachusetts 02173
10. PHCfiRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
Modification No. 3
Contract No. 68-03-3505
12, SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
13. TYPE O* REPORT AND PEBtOD COVEREQ
Final (July 1977-Nov. 1977}
14, SPONSORING AGENCY COOE
IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Reproduced from
besi available copy.
Rath & Strong, Inc., subcontractor to Mechanical Technology, Inc.
BA*"Tfhis report presents estimates of the retail price equivalent (R?£> or
"sticker price" for a variety of automotive exhaust emission control
related cnaponents/systems. The author began with a three-level assucp-
tion as 5.3 industry makeup (supplier, vehicle assembly, dealer) and used
this standard approach along with assumptions as to production volume
and the amounts of labor, overhead, tooling, administrative, and depre-
ciation expenses and profit at the supplier level, tooling, research and
development, and administrative expenses and profit at the vehicle
assenbly level, and labor, overhead, and profit at the dealer level to
determine the RPE. Where little physical description of a component
could be found, a. "best guess" effort was made. A methodology description
is also included. It should be noted that since a specific production
volume was assumed in each case, the RPE estimates are valid only within
some relevant range of production volumes.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
Air Pollution
Exhaust Systems
Cast Estimates
Labor Estimates
Material Estimates
Catalytic Converters
Air Injection
Manufacturing Co
Tooling
Methodology
b.lOENTif!EP.S/OP£N ENDED TERMS
;ts
c. COSATI Field/Group
19. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS
31. NO. Of PAGES
M. SECURITY CUASS (Thuptft)
22. PRICE
-------
EPA-460/3-80-001
COST ESTIMATIONS FOR EMISSION
CONTROL RELATED COMPONENTS/SYSTEMS
AND COST METHODOLOGY DESCRIPTION
HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS
by
LeRoy H. Lindgren
Rath & Strong, Inc.
21 Won hen Road
Lexington, Massachusetts
02173
Order No. A-2002-NASX
EPA Project Officer: Susan Vintiila
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air, Noise and Radiation
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
February 1980
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report technical data
of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are available free of charge to Ft-
deral employees, current contractors and grantees, and nonprofit organizations - in li-
mited quantities - from the Library Services Office (MD-35), Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27711; or, for a fee, from the National Technical Information Ser-
vice. 5285 Port Royal Road. Springfield, Virginia 22161.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by Rath & Strong, Inc., 21
Worthen Road, Lexington. Massachusetts, in fulfillment of Order No. A-2002-NASX. The
contents of this report are reproduced herein as received from Rath & Strong, Inc. The opinions,
findings, and conclusions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the
Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of company or product names is not to be
considered as an endorsement bv the Environmental Protection Agency.
Publication No. EPA-460/3-80-001
i i
-------
PREFACE
This raport consists of the development of a manufacturing cost data
base of a group of emission systems and components as specified by the
Environmental Protection Agency. The cost methodology is included for
each system. TI',2 dollar amounts presented in this report are in terrs
of 1977 dollars.
RATH & STRONG
IHCCrlPOIATtD
ill
-------
Scope of Work
A. The contractor shall provide all of the necessary facilities, equipment, personnel,
analysis, and reporting required to complete the following tasks in an efficient
and effective manner.
B. Task 1 - Cost of Components/Systems
1. The contractor shall provide cost estimates for the emission control or
emission control related components/systems listed in Attachment A for 4,
6, and 8-cylinder engines with further cost breakdowns of these
components/systems where indicated on the attachment. These individual
costs shall include but not be limited to the following; a) material costs; fa)
labor costs; c) overhead costs, including indirect labor, supplies, electricity,
heating, plant and equipment repairs, supervision, plant and equipment
depreciation, insurance; and d) appropriate markup rates or factors.
2. These costs shall reflect economies of scale, current material, labor, and
overhead costs, appropriate manufacturing processes, and shall be ranged to
reflect a 3-year or s 12-year writeoff of investment.
3. The Project Officer must approve the choice of production volume used in
calculating the effect due to economy of scale.
C. Task 2 - Description of Methodology
1. The contractor shell provide a detailed description of the methodology used
to determine the estimates in Task 1 above. Where possible, more than one
method shall be used to increase the assurance of the estimates' accuracy.
RATH & STRONG
D«t
/
-------
Ack no w ledgemef its
This report has been generated from engineering data available at this writing.
Some of the data is based on industrial engineering judgment. The cost data is
based on the best possible industrial engineering estimating procedures using
product knowledge, manufacturing experience, and learning curve techniques.
Whenever possible other estimating work was used for comparative purposes.
Also, the aftermarket selling price data was used to establish a frame of
reference or an order of magnitude cost computation using known discount data.
The author would like to acknowledge the cooperation of EPA personnel Mr.
Karl Hellman and Ms, Susan Vintilla. Mr. W. Leitch and Ms. S. Zemann of Rath &
Strong were major contributors to this repcrt. The production office of Rath &
Strong typed and edited the final report to a lf,vel of detail beyond the original
plan of work.
RATH & STRONG
INCORPORATED
\l
-------
Attachment A
Components/Systems to be Cost-Estimated
"1. PCV valve
I
• 2. TCS (thermal control switch)
3. OSAC (orifice spark advance control)
4. Deceleration valve
f
5. Anti-dieseling solenoid
6. Air injection system (breakdown by: pump, dump, lines, exh. man. mods.)
7. Air switching system (breakdown by: approx. 3 foot of tubing, 2-way valve)
8. Rsed valve air system
9. EGR system (types: sonic-electronic with and without cooler, sonic-pneumatic
with and without cooler, back-pressure modulated, venturi vac amplified)
10. Pelleted oxidation catalyst (as a function of volume, noble metal loading, and
* composition)
11. Monolithic oxidation catalyst (as a function of volume, noble metal loading, and
composition)
12. Pelleted reduction catalyst (as a function of volume, noble metal loading, and
$ composition)
13. Monolithic reduction catalyst (as a function of volume, noble metal loading, and
composition)
14. Monolithic start catalyst (as a function of volume, noble metal loading, and
J composition)
15. Monolithic 3-way catalyst (as a function of volume, noble metal loading, and
composition)
16. Metallic reduction catalyst (as a function of volume, noble metal loading, and
"r" composition)
17. Oxygen sensor (as a function of Pt loading)
IB. Electronic fuel metering system (breakdown by: actuators, regulator, filters,
tubing, pump, nozzles (ff of cylinders plus ons\ vol air flow sensor (L-Jetronic
* and K-Jetronic type), mass air flow sensor (Chrysler type)
RATH A STRONG
ftAT
V;
-------
19. Thermal reactor (types; insulated with core, insulated without core)
20. Exhaust manifold (stock)
21. Port liners (types: cast in, inserted air-gap with and without locater ribs)
22. Radiator (types: stock, with 20% weight reduction)
23. Quick heat manifold (breakdown by: EFE valve with vacuum motor actuation and
with 25 in wavy steel heat transfer surface replacing 25 in of cast iron)
24. Super early fuel evaporation (breakdown by: 2 valves, heat transfer surface,
tubing)
25. Electric heated choke
26. High energy ignition
27. Breaker point ignition (breakdown by: centrifugal advance system, vacuum
advance system)
28. Improved exhaust system (cost per foot of stainless steel from exhaust manifold
to catalyst)
29, Standard steel exhaust system (cost per foot of low carbon steel from exhaust
manifold to approximate catalyst location)
30. Insulated exhaust pipe (cost per foot of double wall stainless steel)
31. Carburetor modifications for altitude compensation (breakdown by: aneroid,
linkage)
32. Carburetor modifications for feedback control unit (1, 2, 4 barrels)
33. Standard Carb (1, 2, 4 barrels)
34. Electronic control unit (with sensor inputs for controlling modulated AIR,
modulated EGR, modulated A/F, modulated spark advance)
35. Air modulation system (with vacuum control)
36. Spark knock sensor (with piezo-electric accelerometer or pickup)
37. Transducers + Sensors (types: r-LQ temperature, inlet air temperature, throttle-
position, engine speed, engine load, fuel flow, transmission gear, EGR, pintol
position, crank angle, humidity)
RATH & STRONG
INCORPORATED
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
INTRODUCTION
I A Secondary Air Injection System 10
I A - 1 Air Pump System 10
I A - 2 Air Switching System 29
I A - 3 Reed Air Valve 37
IB Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) 47
I C Catalytic Converters 62
ID Air-Fuel Metering 124
ID - 1 Electronic Fuel Injection 124
ID - 3 Standard Carburetor 140
I D - 3a Carburetor Modification for Altitude 149
I D - 3b Carburetor Modification for Feed Back Control 159
I E Electronic Control Unit (Microprocessor) 163
I F Sensors 174
I F - 1 Oxygen Sensor 174
IF - 2 Spark Knock Sensor 183
I F - 3 Sensors and Transducers 186
RATH & STRONG
INCORPORATED
• i'
I// II
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd)
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
APPENDIX -' METHODOLOGY COST DERIVATION
RATH & STRONG
IMCOBFOHATID
', M
Paqe
I G Actuators 194
I G - 1 EGR Valve Position Actuator 194
I G - 2 Turbocharger Waste Gate Position Actuator 195
I G - 3 Secondary Air Modulation Valve Position Actuator 196
IH Thermal Reactor 203
11 Ignition Systems 211
11 - 1 Breaker Point Ignition System 211
11 - 2 High Enerqy (Electronic) Ignition System 220
IK Turbocharger 227
HEAVY DUTY DIESEL ENGINES
IIB Universal Fuel Injection System 237
IIE Positive Crankcase Ventilation Valve 242
IIG Paniculate. Trap 250
-------
I n t roduc. 11 on
In its regulation of the heavy duty truck industry, the U. S.
En v i ronmert ta 1 Protection Agency Is frequently confronted
with the Issue of cost to the consumer of systems installed
on automobiles for the purpose of controlling emissions.
Ideally, it would be desirable to determine the economic
impact on the consumer for any emission standard proposed
and on any vehicle for which such a standard would be
applicable. Since such a task would involve a very high
level of effort, a more realistic goal would be to determine
an aggregate cost estimate representative of the cost of
all components or systems of a similar nature, for example,
EGR valves or EGR systems. This would necessarily Imply
that many individual components or systems could be expected
to cost more or less than the aggregate or weighted average
cost estimate.
In most situations a full cost, as opposed to a differential
cost approach is more appropriate for determining the true
cost of producing a particular component, This means that
all components comprised by a truck must reflect a
share of fixed overhead and corporate level costs such as
RATH « STRONG
-------
salaries, maintenance, Insurance, heat, power, lighting,
and so on. This approach Is consistent with changes made
to a vehicle which are expected to be of a relatively long-
term nature whereas the differential cost approach of merely
reflecting the addition of direct material, direct labor,
and variable overhead costs due to an added component Is
adequate only for relatively short-term purposes.
Taking Into account all of the variations In Industry makeup
which exist In the real world would present a very complex
problem. For example, the number of suppliers supplying
a corporation with a given component varies not only among
the different components on a given vehicle but among the
different vehicle manufacturers as well. Some suppliers
are in turn supplied by other suppliers. Some suppliers
supply components to more than one manufacturer. These
varfatlons Influence production volume which in turn in-
fluences the economies of scale attainable by a manufacturer,
To make trie problem more manageable, assumptions have
made which help simplify the cost estimate task. Figure 1,
oelow, depicts the industrial makeup assumed in this study.
RATH A STRONG
-------
Judicious choice of production volumes helps minimize
cost differences due to the reliance upon more than one
supplier. (Truck manufacturers are sometimes supplied
a given component by more than one supplier as a precaution
against labor strikes or other occurrences which might in-
terrupt that supply.)
Ful 1 Component/System
Cost to Con s ume r
(Reta i 1 Price Equ i v.)
i
Dea1e r Leve 1
Corpora te Leve 1
^Vehicle Assembly)
Manufacturer Level
(Supplier, Vendor, or
Division)
Figure I - 3~Level Industrial Makeup
It should also be noted that supplier (or vendor) and division
can DC used synonymously since the cost to the corporate
level will be the same even though the division is a part
of the corporation. This is because the division is managed
as a profit center, that is, the corporation has placed the
RATH & STRONG
IMCOIPOIATEO
-------
division in competition with other suppliers as a means of
assuring a high level of efficiency. Therefore, the division's
transfer price as it is called is the same as an independent
supplier's price to the vehicle manufacturer.
With the three levels of Industry making up the major elements
of cost to the consumer, or, as used in this study, retail
price equivalent, the basic formula is:
Recall
Price
Equivalent
Direct Direct Fixed &
Material Labor Variable
Overhead
x 11+0.2 for Corporate + 0.2 for Supplier
Allocation Profit
+ Tooling + Land & I
Expense Buildingsf
Expense j
x ^1 + 0.2 for Corporate +0.2 for Corporate
Allocation Profit
+0,4 for Dealer/ + Research & + Tooling
Overhead i ( Development Expense
Profit J
Or, in abbreviate^ forts:
RPE - ([DM + DL + Onlf 1.41 + TE + LBE>U-8> + RD + TE
LBEHLsi + RD +
4
RATH A STRONG
-------
Direct materials entail those materials of which a given
component Is comprised. Where possible actual weights of
materials were used, but in some instances, estimates based
on drawings and sketches were made necessary because of a
lack of data. To determine the- cost of materials, prices
per unit weight as quoted in A merican Met a 1 Ma rk e t" were
used plus 10%*" to account for material waste and scrappage.
Direct labor includes the cost of laborers dirtctly involved
in the fabrication of a given component. It has been det-
ermined by using standard industrial engineering data and
procedures.
Overhead includes both the fixed and variable components of
overhead. The fixed portion includes supervisory salaries,
building maintenance, heat, power, lighting, and other costs
which are substantially unaffected by production volume while
the variable portion includes small expendable tools, devices,
and materials used in production, repairs and maintenance
made to machines directly involved, and other overhead costs
Metal Working News Edition
Two exceptions are noteworthy: 1) exhaust systems assume
approximately 35$ scrappage, and 2) noble metals used
in catalysts assume no waste or scrappage.
RATH A STRONG
INCdMaiATCS
-------
which tend to vary with production volume, A straight
of the direct labor amount Is used to determine all overhead
cos ts.
A figure cf 201 applied to the sum of material, labor, and
overhead costs is used to determine corporate allocation,
in other words, the amount needed to cover the supplier's
support from its front office. Also to the sum of material,
labor, and overhead costs, a figure of 201 is applied to
determine the supplier's profit, approximately half of which
is used to pay corporate taxes with the remaining portion
being divided between dividend disbursements to stockholders
and retained earnings, which are used to finance working
capital requirements (increases in current assets and/or
decreases In current liabilities) and/or new capital ex-
penditures (long-term assets).
Tooling expense consists of four components: one year re-
curring tooling expenses (tool bits, disposable jigs and
fixtures, etc.); three year non~recurrIng tooling expenses
(dies, etc.); twelve y«ar machinery and equipment expenses;
and twelve year launching costs (machinery foundations and
other incidental set-up costs) which have been assumed to
be 10? of the cost of machinery and equipment.
RATH A STRONG!
INCORPORATE:?
-------
The construction of new production facilities has been
assumed In some cases and their cost is amortized over
*»0 years. In most instances, however, space in existing
facilities was assumed to have been made available for
production purposes and, hence, is covered in the overhead
cos ts.
The sum of the above costs, that is, material, labor, plant
overhead, tooling expense, corporate allocation, and profit,
makes up the price (or, in the case of a division, transfer
price) which the supplier charges the vehicle manufacturer
for a given component. At the vehicle assembly level, 20%
of this price is charged or allocated for the vehicle
manufacturer's corporate level support and 20% for corporate
profit. To this is added research and development costs.
(R & D may not wholly reflect all vehicle certification
costs.) Also, a figure of kQ% is applied to the supplier
price to account for the dealer's margin which includes
sales commissions, overhead, and profit.
Because of the need, in many instances, to make modifications
to the engine or body to incorporate a component and to assemble
it into a vehicle, these have also been accounted for at the
division level and transferred to the corporate level at
veh i cle asserably.
7
RATH A STRONG
-------
Production volume Is a very important assumption since It
dictates not only over what number of units costs will be
amortized or spread but also on what scale production will
take place, in other words, the types and costs of machinery
iind equipment that will be involved. For this reason, the
retail price equivalent estimates determined in this study
are mear.: n gl ess unless they are qualified with their asso-
ciated production volume and are accurate only within some
relevent range of volumes around that production volume.
In some instances, more than one production volume is
assumed for the various Individual parts making up a given
component or system. This results from the assumption of
necessary economies of scale for these parts where the
vehicle manufacturer is not the only customer for whom they
are produced. For example, hoses are frequently produced
at higher unit volumes In order to satisfy more than just
a single customer or market.
By discounting aftermarket selling prices, when available,
by between 1M to 1/5, bracketing of the supplier's price
had been expected to serve as a check against these estimates.
However, because of differences between the assumptions In-
herent in this study and in actual production, variations
may exist. It Is assumed that these differences result from
8
RATH A STRONGI
INCOHPBIATfll
-------
a given component either being of * somewhat proprietary
nature and hence priced higher than assumed here (possibly,
at what the market wi II bear) cr are a result of subtle
changes, for whatever reason, which do not allow full
maximization of available economies of scale or a com-
bination of the above two reisons.
All of the RPE estimates contained herein are by definition
subject to some error. Where little physical description
was available, a "best guess11 effort was made and naturally
these estimates are subject to more error. But, in general,
those shown in greater detail are expected to be somewhat
more accurate. To those critics who have significant dis-
agreements with these estimates, it can be assumed that
either their production assumptions are not at these assumed
economies of scale or else they vary with respect to other
specific assumptions made in this study regarding tooling
costs, amortization schedules, profit level, etc., however,
it is expected that a number of vehicle manufacturers may
be below these estimates and a similar number above.
RATH A STRONG
IMCOIPOIATIO
-------
IA - SECONDARY AIR INJECTION SYSTEMS
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
The detailed descriptions and calculations following this page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - OC2, March, 1973. The
coats shown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later In this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles ia 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
1. Air Pump System
Automobile
Unit Cost
Material
Labor and Overhead
Equipment
Tooling
7.83
3.00
.30
.66
1.3
2.7
2,4
3.4
Weighted EOS Factor
X Automobile Retail Price Equivalent
1,8
$31.88
Truck Retail Price Equivalent
$57.38
* 350,000/50,000 = 2.81 Doublings
10
RATH A STRONG
-------
Air Injection System
Air Pump Systems—American Motors Air Guard, Chrysler Air Injection,
Ford Thermactor & General Motors Air Injection Reactor (A.l.R.)
All air pump systems. Figures 1 and 2, consist of an air injection pump,
air injection tubes (one for each cylinder), a mixture control or backfire
by-pass valve (added in 1966, '57), a diverter or air by-pass valve
(added in 1 968), check valves (one for in-line engines, two for V-8 engines),
air manifolds, pipes and hoses necessary to connect the various components.
Carburetors and distributors for engines with an air pump system are
designed especially for these engines; and, they should not be interchanged
with, or replaced by, carburetors or distributors for engines without the air
pumps.
•*»
The air injection pump, Figures 3, 4, and 5, compresses the air and injects
it through the air manifolds, hoses, and injection tubes into the exhaust
system, in the area of the exhaust valves. The fresh air burn* w1 th
the unburned portion of the exhaust gases, thus minimizing CO and HC
content of Ihe exhaust.
The mixture control or backfire by-pass valve, when triggered by
a sharp increase ir. manifold vacuum (as when the throttle is suddenly closed),
supplies the intake manifold with fresh filtered air, to lean out the fuel-air
mixture and prevent exhaust system backfire.
The diverter or air by-pass valve. Figures 6 and 7,when similarly triggered
by a sharp increase in manifold vacuum, shuts off the injected air to the
exhaust ports; and, helps to prevent backfiring during this period, when the
mixture is exceptionally rich. During engine overrun, all the air from the
11
RATM * STRONG
ineo**o**vco
-------
pump it dumped through the muffler on the dlverter or air by-pass valve.
At high engine speeds, the pump produces more air than the engine can
use, and th« excess is dumped through the pressure relief valve, when that
valve is part of the air pump. Figures 3 and 4, or, through the diverter or
air by-pass valve when the pressure relief valve is part of that valve, Figure 7.
The check valve or valves prevent exhaust gases from entering and damaging
thf air injection pump, as back flow can occur even under normal operating
conditions.
When properly installed and maintained, the system wil! effectively reduce
exhaust emissions. However, if any system components or any engine
component that operates in conjunction with the air pump system should
malfunction, exhaust emissions might increase.
Because of the relationship between engine operating condition and unburned
exhaust gases, the condition of the engine Jnd tune-up should be checked
whenever the air pump system seems to be malfunctioning. Particular care
should be tuken in checking items that affect fuel-air ratio, such as crankcase
ventilation system (PCV), the carburetor and carburetor air cleaner.
12
RATH ft STRONG
-------
Air Injection Systems
M1JCTUKE
CONTROL
VALVE
IN LINE
MirruRE
CONTROL
VALVE
Alt INJECTION
PUMP
CHECK
VALVE
VI
Fig. J Typical installation of an air pump system with a mix-
ture control to.'ce, otherwise known as a backfire by-pass vahe
c;vnmt
oner
CHICK VAlVt.
M UMl
V8
Fig. 2 Typical installation of an air pump tysfem with a dioerter
valve, otheruist known at an air by-pats osier. 1968-73
RATH A STRONG
IBBBBPSIATZI
-------
Air In}ectlcn Syi?.ems
wtssune
mutt
7UM
UAI CQvfl
NOUUMC'
Fig. 3 Air injection pump icit/i separate
fir filter, J965-57
Fig. 4 Air injetfion pump with integral
centrifueal air filler. Starting 1965
VINT HQU PO NOT Olt
KUE>
MOUSING
Fig. 5 Air insertion pump tcifh integral
centrifugal air filter without pressure calve
I Covfr in*ehn{
tefts
t Cover HMmMy
AI biJwBon »ump—«w*
-------
Air Injection Systems
VAiVI IN
QPeN
POSITION
SIGNAL IINE
CONI^CTON
A)? MIT
A^iL-Si VAIVS tN
5 fe-'f|LciOS£D
* r ./Hj POSITION
;u:;,^
DUP«*0H-OPEI7 V~l
POSITIONS "**• >
CLOSED
B in
!1 1
CHECK
rvAivg
. 6
O~;jT^
?'•••?•»
•^••r?.
- iS
SH3NAl UNi
CONNECTION
VAIVI IN OrSN MSTTiON
F 1 B • 7
Cwrlar or iir by-psc
15
RATH & STRONG
INCOflPCIIIATID
-------
A1r Injection Systems
cnmrrs
WHET-
SIGNAl'
UNt
CONNECTION
DIVERTED AIR
OUTLET
IAPHRAGM
ASSE/.-3LY
F1 9 « Q Typ>ej! <(vtrttr Of *lr By-r«» *•;«» »-rtt-.
pivuuft I«U«f
, 9 Cortwntontl typi pump »ir «)t»r
16
RATH A STRONG
INCOIPBMTtO
-------
Air injection Systems
Pontiec
'Fig. 10 - JUR HJMf
1973 tti cylM« air tump imttllrtjen. 1*72 • unit*
117] VI »lr
17
RATH A STRONG
-------
Air Injection System
BILL OF MATERIAL
Pump Assem
Housing
Hub
Shaft
Cover
Rotor
Bearings
Vanes
Vane Shoes
Shoe Springs
Carbon Seal
Tubes
Relief Valve
Hardware
Fan
Air Manifold
Hoses
Pipes
A 1 Tubes
Pulley
Mtg. Brkt
Hardware
A P Bracket
__A'P Beit
Material
Assem
Aium
Steel
Steel
Alum
fr< Steel
Steel
PM
PM
Steel
PM
Steel
Steel
Steel
Plastic
Stee!
Rubber
Steel
Steel
Steel
Steel
Steel
Steel
Rubber
Weight
7.690
3.500 .
.200
.090
1 . 000 •
.303
.400
.300
.100
.050
.100
.300
.150
.200
1.000
2.000
0.500
.300
1.000
.950
2.590
1.500
.250
.230
Mat
Costs
-
2.1000
.0400
.0180
.6000
.0600
.2000
.1200
.0400
.0100
.0400
.0600
.0300
.0400
.8000
4.1580
1 . 0000
.1000
.0600
.5000
.1900
.5180
.3000
.0500
.0460
2.,c*rt
* / 0 *!' 'j
18
Labor
.1250
.1250
.0625
.0312
.0625
.0312
.0625
.0625
.0312
.0153
.0156
.0156
.1250
.0156
.0625
.8433
.0625
.0312
.0156
.0312
.0625
.0625
.0156
.0312
.0156
19 70
Labor
Overhead
.0500
.OSOO
.0250
.0125
.0250
.0125
.0250
.0250
.0125
.0062
.0062
.0062
.0500
.0062
.0250
. ?373
.0250
.0125
.0062
.0125
.0250
.0250
.0062
.0125
.0062
1 •?! 1
Mfg
Costs Reference
.1750 07817806
2.2750
.1275
.0617
.6875
.1037
.2875
.2075
.0337
.0318
.0618
.0818
.2050
.0618
.8875
5.3388
1.0875
.1437
.0*18
.5437
.2775 03927116
.6055 4027214
.3218
.0937
.0678 4027350
3.2230
RATM * STRONG
-------
Air Injection System
Valves and Filter
Part
Air Pump Filter
Air Horn
Filter
Body
Mix Contr. VI v
Valve
Valve Spring
Housing
Diaphragm
Cap
Diaphragm Spr
Pin
Divsrter 6
Relief Valve
Housing
Pin 6 Valve
Spring
Diaphragm
Relief Valve
Rel Vive Spr
_Rel Vlvt Cover
Material
Assem
Sieef
paper
Steel
Assem
PM
Steel
Steel
Copper
Steel
Steel
Steel
Assem
Steel
Steel
Steel
Copper
PM
Steel
Steel
BILL
Weight
.300
.100
.100
.100
.890
.090
.100
.200
.100
.200
.100
.100
1.230
.500
.250
.125
.125
.052
.063
.115
OF MATERIAL
Mat
Costs
.0200
.0100
.0200
-(IROO
-
.0360
.0200
.0'400
.0800
.0400
.0200
.0200
.25sn
_
,1000
.0500
.0250
.1000
.0200
.0120
.0230
.3300
Labor
.0312
.0525
.0312
.0156
.1405
.1250
.0625
.0156
.0625
.0312
.0312
.0156
.0625
.4061
.1250
.0625
.0312
.0156
.0312
.0312
.0156
.0312
.3435
Labor
Overhead
.0125
.0250
.0125
.0062
.0562
.0500
.0250
.0062
.0250
.0125
.0125
.0062
.0250
. 1624
.0500
.0250
.0125
.0062
.0125
.0125
.0062
.0125
.1374
Mfg
Costs
.0437
.1075
.0837
.0418
_77£7_
.1750
.1235
.0418
.1275
.1237
.0837
.0418
.1075
.8245
.1750
.1875
.0937
.0468
.1437
.0637
.0338
.0667
.8109
Reference
See Sketch
3769895
27.95
7043229
14.80
36710*14
16.60
0*4974265
4.80
19
RATH & STRONG
IMCOIPORAYIO
-------
Air Injection System and
BiH of Material (cont'd)
Part
Material
Weight
Mat
Costs
Labor
Labor
Overhead
Mfg
Costs
Reference
Valve Hoses Rubber
Clamps Steel
Vshicle Assem
Engine Mod -
1.000
.200
.2000
,0400
.0625
.0156
. 3753
.1250
,0250
.0062
,1500
.0500
.2875
.0618
. 525C
.1750
Assem Vehicle
.24
1.0493
Total Vehicle
A I-System
3.5111
20
RATH A STRONG
INBHIPO HATED
-------
'C !"j?cll Cover
Rotor
Bearings
Vanes
Vane Slwes
Shoe Springs
Carbon Seal
Tubes
Relief Valve
Hardware
Fan
Economic
Volume
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5, 000, 000
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
30,000,000
30.000,000
5,000,000
15,000,000
5,000,000
15,000,000
5,000,000
1 Year
Recurring
Tooling
.0200
100,000
.0400
200,000
.0100
50,000
.0020
10,000
.0100
50,000
.0040
20, 000
.0050
50,000
.0040
60,000
.0010
30,000
.0007
20,000
.0020
10,000
.0013
20,000
.0100
50, 000
.0067
too. ooo
.0040
20.000
3 Year Non-
Recurrlng
Tooling
.3333
500,000
.0667
1,000,000
.0200
300,000
.0020
30,000
,0167
250,000
.0020
30,000
.0050
150,000
.0030
360,000
.0040
360,000
.0013
120,000
.0020
30,000
.0008
36,000
.0080
120,000
.00t>7
300,000
.002
-------
Ait-Injection System--Tool Ing Costs--AmorUzatlpn Per Part
1
>
2 X
n
o a* h
» is
0 *rt
V j
H 31
" 0
2
0
Part
Air Manifold
Hoses
Pipes
j A ! Tubes
$
Pulley
Mtg Bracket
Hardware
A/P Bracket
A/POelt
Air Pum.i Filler
Air Horn
Filter
Body
Economic
Volume
1,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
5,000,000
} 000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
1 Year
Recurring
Tooling
.0100
10,000
.0040
20,000
.0020
10,000
.0060
30,000
,0100
20.000
,0100
20,000
.0100
50,000
.0100
20,000
.0020
10,000
.O6«i0
.0020
10,000
.0040
20,000
.0040
20,000
.0010
20,000
.OHO
3 Year Non-
Recurring
Tooling
.0067
20,000
.0017
25,000
.0008
12,500
.0060
90, 000
.0050
30, 000
.0050
30. 000
.0010
60,000
,0050
30,000
.0020
30.000
.0362
.0020
30,000
.0040
60,000
.0040
60.000
.0040
60,000
.Ol«t1
12 Year
Machinery
L Equip
.00*12
50,000
.0025
150.000
.0006
50,000
.0020
120,000
.0025
60,000
.0025
60,000
.0020
120,000
.0025
60, 000
.0010
60,000
.0200
.0010
60,000
.0020
120,000
.0020
120.000
.0020
120,000
,.0070
12 Year
Launching
Costs
.0004
5,000
. OOJt
15,000
.0001
5,000
,0002
12,000
.0002
6,000
,0002
6,000
.0002
12,000
.0002
6,000
.0001
6,000
.0018
.0001
6.000
.0002
12.000
.0002
12,000
.0002
12,000
,0007
40 Year Amortization
Land (, Per
Buildings Piece
.0212
. 0-J8A
-
.0038
-
.01*2
-
.0177
.017?
.0162
.0177
.0051
. 1220
.0051
.0162
.0102
.0102
.0357
-------
Air Injection System—Tooilng Costs—Amortization Per Part
3J
_j
i X
n
o a, h
" *"
I 5
s n
0
0
Mix Cont Valve
Valve
Valve Spring
Housing
Diaphragm
a Cap
rt
Diaphragm Spr
Pin
Dlv 6 Rel Valve
Housing
Pin E Valve
Spring
Diaphragm
Relief Valve
Rel Valve Spr
Rel Vive Cover
Economic
Volume
2.500,000
2,500.000
5,000,000
2.500,000
2,500,000
2,500,000
5.000,000
5,000,000
2,500.000
2,500.000
2,500,000
5,000,000
2.500,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
2,500,000
I Year
Recurring
Tooling
.0100
25,000
.0100
25,000
.0020
10,000
.0100
25,000
.3010
10.000
.ftlUO
IS.Ot'O
.0100
53,000
.0020
10,000
0^80
.0100
25.000
.0100
25.000
.0200
50.000
.0020
10,000
.001(0
10,000
.0100
50,000
.0020
10.000
.00*10
10,000
n f. •"* t\
3 Year Non-
Recurring
Tool ing
.0100
75,000
.0100
75,000
.0020
30,000
.0100
75.000
.0040
30,000
,0100
75,000
.0020
30,000
.0020
30.000
.QSOQ
.0100
75,000
.0100
75,000
.0200
150,000
.0020
30,000
.00*10
30,000
.0100
150,000
.0020
30.000
,0040
30,000
12 Year
Machinery
6 Equip
.0020
60,000
.0010
120,000
.0010
60,000
.00(10
120,000
.0020
60,000
.0020
60.000
.0010
60,000
.0006
36, 000
.0166
.0020
60, 000
.0010
120,000
.0040
120,000
.0010
60,000
.0020
60,000
.0020
120,000
.0010
60,000
. 0020
60,000
r\. % S3 s\
12 Year
Launching
Costs
.0002
6,000
.0001
12,000
.0001
6.000
.0004
12,000
.0002
6,000
.0002
6,000
.0001
6.000
.0001
3.600
.0017
.0002
5,000
.0004
12,000
.0004
12,000
.0001
6,000
.0002
6, (100
. 0002
12,000
.0001
6,000
. 0002
6,000
,'* n if)
10" Year Amortization
Land & Per
Buildings Piece
.0222
-
.0244
.0051
.0244
f
.0102
.0222
.0131
.0047
.1261
.0222
.0244
.0444
.0051
.0102
.0222
.0051
,0102
i 'f i "
-------
Air injection System
Tooling Costs
Amortization Per Part
Economic
Part Volume
> Valve Hoses 5,000,000
X I
0
0 ft NJ
» ~ ,p»
i «
g 8 Clamps 10,000.000
0
z
Vehicle Assem 300, 000
Engine Mod 300,000
Assem Vehicle
1 Year
Recurring
Tooling
.0020
10,000
.0050
50,000
.1000
30,000
,1000
30,000
3 Year Non-
Recurrlng
Tooling
.0020
30,000
.0050
150.000
.1000
90,000
.1000
90,000
12 Year
Machinery
f. Equip
.0020
120,000
.0030
360,000
.10*0
360, 000
.1010
360. 000
12 Year 40 Ye*,r Amortization
Launching Land & Per
Costs Buildings Piece
.0002 .0062
12,000
.0003 .0133
36,000
.0101 .3100
36,000
•OIO° .3!30
36,000
.0395
Total A 1 System 1.5994
-------
Air Injection System
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
Part
Pump
Pump Assem
Relief Valve
Fan
Air Manifold
Hoses
Pipes & Tubes
Pulley
Belt
Mktg. Brkts.
Hardware
Air Injec & Pump
Air Pump Filter
f-A\x Contr Vive
Diverter £
Relief Valve
Valve Hoses
Clamps
Total Ai System
Mat
3.32SO
.0000
.0300
.3000
1.0000
.1000
.5600
.1900
.0460
,5630
.3000
& 9 '-5 0
.0800
.2560
.3300
.2000
.0400
Labor*
§5310
.1250
.1250
.0625
.0625
,«12
.0468
.0625
.0156
.0937
.0156
1 1 7
.1405
.4061
.3435
.0625
.0156
Plant
Over-
Head
.2124
.0500
.0500
.0250
.0250
.0125
.0187
.0250
.0062
.0375
.0062
1 4 4685
.0562
.1624
.137*
.0250
.0062
Plant
Costs
4.0714
.1750
.2050
.8875
1.0875
.1*837
.6255
.2775
.0678
.6992
.3218
R 5 f, ] Q
.2767
.8245
.8109
.2875
.0618
Tooling
Exp. Inv.
.2085
.0533
.0180
.0064
.0167
.0057
.0148
.0150
.0040
.0300
.0140
.3864
.0280
. 1080
. 1240
.0040
.0100
.1489
.0690
.0066
.0022
.0346
.0027
.0031
.0027
.0011
.0034
.0022
.2485
.0077
,0183
.019*
.0022
.0033
.20MC
Corp
.8143
.0350
.0410
.1775
.2175
.0287
.1251
.0555
.0135
.1398
.0644
.0553
.1649
. 1622
.0575
.0124
.20MC
Corp
Profit
.3143
.0350
.0410
.1775
.2175
.0287
.1251
.0555
.0135
. 1398
.0644
.0553
.1649
.1622
.0575
.0124
Mfg/
Vendor
Costs
6.0574
.367'
1
1.5433
.2095
.3936
.4062
. 1000
1.0143
.4667
12.6215
,4231
1.2C06
1.2791
.4087
.059!
i o . t t 2 E
25
RATH A STRONG
IMC01POIATCD
-------
Air Injection System
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
AT THE VEHICLE LEVEL
Plant Tools
Vendor £
Part Costs R£D Equip
AI Pump 12.6215 1.000
AI Valves 3- *»91 3
Vehicle Assem .S250 - .;13S
Engine Mod. .1750 - .3)00
Total Vehicle
Retail Price
Equivalent
Corp. Corp.
Alloc Profit
2.5243 2.5H3
.5933 .6353
.1050 .1050
.0350 .0350
Dealer
Markup
5.0^85
1.2365
.2100
.0700
Vehicle
Retail Price
Equivalent
23.71*7
6.l3i3
1 .2550
.SZ5C
31 .3333
R £ 0 Is estimated to be $300,000 per year. Allocated over 300,000
vehicles per year results in $1.00 per vehicle.
26
RATH A 3TRQNQ
-------
Air Injection System
Cost Comparison to AftermarketSelling Prices
Using the lftP«Tn»rket discount data and the after-market selling prices,
the Air Injection System costs are:
Disc
Air Pump Assembly 62. 95
Pulley 2.64
B racket Assembly 3. 60
Dlverter Valve 11.80
Mixture Controi Valve It. 00
15.7U
.66
.90
2.95
3.50
Disc
V5
12.59
.53
,72
2.3S
2.80
Estimated
Vendor
Costs
7.9874
.4062
1.0U3
1.2791
1.2806
27
RATH A STRONG
INCORPDIATIO
-------
Air Injection System
Cost Methodology
The weight data were obtained from both the Chrysler data and the Qidsrnobiie
data bocks. The material costs are compiled using the AMM mill prices.
The labor costs are estimates based on mass production tooling and equipment.
The economies of scale are specified in the tooling estimates. The overhead data
are based on the information supplied from one of the automobile companies.
The tooling costs are based on mass production estimates of die, mold, and
fixture coats. The equipment estimates are based on the current costs of new
equipment. The land and building estimate is based on published information, on
an actual production facility for General Motors.
Air Injection System
The installations in various engines, depending upon company, vary significantly.
Therefore, each system cost can be constructed from the prior detail data. See
the installation sketches to confirm the data.
28
RATH A STRONG
INSOBPOBATIB
-------
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
2, Air Switching System
The detailed descriptions and calculations following thi» page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978. The
costs shown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
aeale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
per year) for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Material
Labor and Overhead
Equipment
Tools
Weighted
Automobile
Unit Cost
.163
.410
.025
.033
Factor
X Automobile Retail Price Equivalent
= Truck Retail Price
Equivalent
EOS
Factor
1.3
2.7
2.4
3.4
2.4
$2.08
$4.99
29
RATH « STRONG
-------
Th« air switching system Is • subsystem and Is usually
associated with the 3-way plus oxidation catalyst
system. An a!r switching valve Is added to the air
Injection line which supplies air to the exhaust
ports. When engine coolant temperature reaches «
predetermined level, the TVS allows a vacuum signal to
be sent to the switching valve which In turn diverts
the air being Injected Into the ports to a point
downstream of the 3~wav catalyst and just upstream of
the oxidation catalyst. In vehicles utilizing electronic
control units (ECU), the ECU may receive signals from
a temperature sensor that indicates when engine temper-
ature is high enough at which time the air is diverted
downstream by a solenoid switching valve.
30
RATH A STRONG
INCOIFOIIATL.-D
-------
Air Switching System
BILL OF MATERIAL
MANUFACTURING COSTS
Component Material
Solenoid Valve Steel
Electric Wiring Plastic
Copper
Hose Rubber
Total
Vehicle Assembly
Engine Modification
Total Vehicle
Ma*
Weight Costs Labor Overhead
.316 .063« .2520 . 1 043
.050 .caoo .0010 .ooo«
.300 .0600 .0300 .01:0
. 163tt .2930 .1212
.0625 .0250
.0312 .0125
Mfg
Costs
.4302
.1020
.-:??£
.0875
. 7048
Reference
Sketch
and EPA
Data
31
RATH & STRONG
IKCO«FO»ATtO
-------
Air Switching System—Tooling Costs—Amortized Per Part
I
H
I
ID
10
0
Z
0
Part
Solenoid Valve
Wiring
Hose
Total
Vehicle Assembly
Engine Modification
Total
Economic
Volume
Per Year
5,000,000
5,000.000
5,000,000
300,000
300,000
1 Year
Recurring
Tooling
.0100
50.000
.0001
2,000
.0010
20,000
.0144
.0083
2,500
.0167
5,000
3 Year Non-
Recurring
Tooling
.0167
250,000
.0002
2,500
.0017
25.000
•Olflq
.0167
15,000
.01 II
10,000
12 Year
Machinery
Equipment
.0200
1,200.000
.0032
IS, 000
.0025
150,000
.0223
.0023
10.000
.0028
10,000
12 Year
Launching
Costs
.0020
120,000
.t)000
1,500
.0002
15.000
.0023
.0003
11.000
.0003
1,000
40 Year Amortization
Land £ Per
Buildings Piece
.0*187
-
.0003
-
.0084
.0579
.0281
.0308
-
. 1168
Research and Development Estimate: $210,000 over 3 Years, or $70,000 per year
for 300,000 vehicles per year, or .2330 per vehicle
-------
Air Switching System
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
Part
Solenoid
Vaive
Wiring £
Hose
Total
Plant
Over-
Mat Labor Head
.0631 .2620 . 1Q1»8
.1000 .0310 .0124
Plant
Mfg
Costs
(MC)
.4302
, 1434
.20/MC
Tooling Corp
Exp. Inv. Costs
•32S? .0220 -SS60
.3.13} .0029 . C237
.20/MC
Corp
Profit
,0350
.0.37
Mfg/
Vendo
Costs
.6509
.2100
.260;
33
RATH A STRONG
INGORPORATID
-------
Air Switching System
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
Part
Solenoid Valve
Wiring £ Hose
Vehicle
Assembly
Engine
Modification
Tota1 RPE
AT THE VEHICLE LEVEL
Plant
Vendor Tools Corp Corp Dealer
Costs and Allocation Profit Markup
(VC) R&D Equip .20VC .20VC .«OVC
.6509 ,2330 - ,1|02 .0302 .260^
.2100 - - .0«20 . 0«0 .0840
.0875 - .0231 .0175 .0175 .C3;0
.0«37 - .0308 .0087 .0087 .0175
Vehicle
Retail
Price
Equivalent
1.404ft
.3780
.1356
.'355
2.0777
34
RATH A STRONG
-------
Air Switching System
Cost Comparison to After-market Selling Prices
This particular valve design does not have an aftermarket price in
our source data (197? catalogs). We can estimate the relative selling
price by comparing selling prices for diverter valves and FCR valves
($14.00 - $18.05).
Diverter £CR
Aftermarket Selling Price $14.00 $18.05
Discount (1/4 Selling Price) 3.50 4.51
Discount (1/5 Selling Price) 2.80 3.61
The vehicle retail price equivalent (RPE) is estimated to
be 2.0777 while the manufacturing costs are .860$ for the
valve and hoses (.6509 vor the valve).
35
RATH & STRONG
INCOIPO1ATID
-------
Air Switching System
Cosi Methodology
The weight data is estimated using similar valve data. The valve design
was, assumed to be solenoid actuated.
The labor costs are estimates of production costs, using today'a technology
and assumed economies of scale. The tooling estimates are based on
knowledge of the mass production processes and equipment.
The assembly costs and the engine modification costs were included in
the costs at the vehicle level.
Air Switching Sy stem
Applications in Various Engine Configurations
This air switching system is assumed to be unaffected by engine size,
36
RATH « STRONG
-------
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINE
3. Reed Air Valve
The detailed descriptions and calculations following this page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978.' The
costs shown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Material
Labor and Overhead
Equipment
Tooling
Weighted
X Automobile Retail
= Truck Retail Price
Automobile
Unit Cost
.880
.335
.024
.077
Factor
Price Equivalent
Equivalent
EOS
Factor
1.3
2.7
2.4
3.4
1.8
$4.64
$8.35
37
RATH * STRONG
IN CO IPO RATIO
-------
Reed Air Valve
Pulse Air Sys tern
The pulse air system Is a simplified reed valve system
that provides an air supply to the exhaust manifold to
help oxidize unburned hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide,
The air suction valve takes atr froji the air cleaner
and Imposes a pulsated air flow at the exhaust valve.
In some applications, this system Is used In place
of an air pump system when lesser amounts of air are
required than which would be provided by an air pump
sys tern.
38
RATH A STRONG
INCOIFPIATCO
-------
(2J THERMAL
VAC SWITCH
i Z
n
O 6» W
• •'* vo
s «
> "I
i 5
0
Z
0
SPARK RETARD DELAY
CHECK VALVE
CAJfiSTER
(1) THERMAL
VAC SWITCH
SEC, CHOKE PULL-
(AIR OUT)
1
•H.E.i. DISTRIBUTOR
CANISTER PURGE UN
PULSE AIR VALVE
EGR VALVE
ASM
CARE
DOVVL
VENT
LFNE
MANIFOLD VACUUM
PORTED VACUUM
(1) FOR TRAPPED VAC. SPARK fe SEC. CHOKE PULL-OFF.
(Z) FOR ECR COLD OVERRIDE.
140 C.I.D. 8-BBL
EMISSION CONTROL
SC HEMATIC
P-AIR/EGR
-------
PULSE AIR VALVE
z X
0
2
CRANKCASE VENT PIPE
FRESH AIR INTAKE
PAIR nESTFlICTION-
3/8" hols In cylinder head (typical 4 places)
CLEANER
SECTION A-A
1977 PULSE AIR SYSTEM 140 C.I.D. L4 ENGINE
-------
Air Suction Valve
from Air Cleaner
to Exhaust Port
Air Suction Pipe
to Exhaust Port
S=al
Vavle Housing
• Callbrmtloas : Flow resistance ; 150 - 2CO 4^mln/-500 aaiAq
Leak ; Maa. 0.2 J/mla, /25S lainAq
41
RATH A STRONG
INCOIPIIMflO
-------
Reed Air Valve
Pulse Air_ System
BILL OF MATERIAL
MANUFACTURING COSTS
4-CYLINDER ENGINE
Component
Manifold
Reed Valve
(6 ft) Suction Pipes
Fittings
Air Intake
Modify Engine Head
Vehicle Assembly
Total Vehicle
Installation
Material
Alum.
Steel
Bronze
Steel
Tubing
Steel
Steel
Tubing
-
-
Weight
.50
.25
1.00
.30
.20
2.25
-
-
Mat
Costs
.300
.100
.300
.120
.060
.880
-
-
Labor
.0416
.1250
0312
.0312
.0100
.2390
.0625
.1250
Labor
Overhead
.0166
.0500
.0125
,0125
.0040
.0955
.0250
.0500
Mfg
Costs Reference
.3582 Figure B37
.2750
. 3«37
. i en
.07ttO
1.2U5
.0875
,1750
1.1*771
42
RATH A STRONG
INCO«»0»»Tia
-------
Reed Air Valve—Tooling Costs--Amortizatlon Par Part
B
H
I X
n
a ^ J>
S w
5 -*
5 ^
0
2
0
Part
Manifold
Reed Valve
Pipes
i
Fittings
Air Intake
Total
Engine Head
Vehicle Assembly
Total Vehicle
Economic
Volume
2,000,000
2,000,000
10,000.000
10,000,000
2,000,000
400,000
400, 000
1 Year
Recurring
Tool Ing
.0100
20,000
.0200
40,000
.0020
20,000
.0050
SO, 000
.0100
20,000
,0170
.0500
20.000
.0250
16,000
3 Year Non-
Recurrlng
Tooling
.0100
60, 000
.0100
60. 000
.0010
30,000
.0010
120,000
.0050
30,000
.0300
.0250
30.000
.0250
30,000
12 Year
Machinery
£ Equip
.0050
120,000
.0100
240.000
.0010
120,000
,0100
1,200.000
.0010
24,000
,0270
.0250
t 20, 000
.0075
36,000
12 Year
Launching
Costs
.000*1
10,000
.0008
20.000
.0001
10,000
.'0312
150,000
.ULH'i
2,000
.0026
.0025
12,000
.0008
3,600
40 Year Amortization
Land £ Per
Buildings Piece
. 025*1
-
.0408
.
,00*41
.0202
.0161
. I06S
.1025
.0583
.267^
RtD estimates $900,000 for 3 years, or $.75 per vehicle.
-------
Reed Air Valve
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
Plant Plant .20MC Mfg/
Over- Mfg Tooling . 20 MC Corp Vendor
Part Mat Labor Head Costs Exp. Inv. Corp Profit Costs
(MC)
Reed Valve .880 .23SO .0555 1.-2H6 .0770 . 32JS .2129 .2^29 1.8070
44
RATH A STRONG
-------
Reed Air Valve
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
AT THE VEHICLE LEVEL
Part
Reed Valve
Engine Mod
Assembly
Total Vehicle
Retail Price
Equivalent
Plant
Vendor
Costs
1.8070
.0875
.1750
Tools
£
R6D Equip
. 7500
.1025
.0583
Corp.
AIloc.
.20VC
.361*
.0175
.0350
Corp.
Profit
.20 VC
.36H
.0175
.0350
Dealer
Markup
.«0 VC
.7223
.0350
.0700
Vehicle
Retail Price
Equivalent
i».0027
.2600
.3733
4.63-SC
45
RATH A STRONG
INCORPORATED
-------
Reed Air Valve
Cost Comparison to Aftermarket Selling Prices
Using the estimated costs, the aftermarket selling prices could vary
between $8.95 and $17.80. No after-market data was available at
this writing.
Reed Air Valve—Cost M^'hodology
The weight data was estimated using the sketches supplied by EPA.
The material costs are compiled using the 1977 AMM mill prices.
The labor costs are estimates of production costs using today's
technology and the assumed economies of scale. The tooling costs are
estimates of the expendable tools and the machinery and equipment
required to produce the components in a mass production environment.
The assembly costs and the engine modification costs were included in
the costs at the vehicle level.
Reed Air Va 1 ve--App1Ications of the System
The applications of the Reed Air Valve systems are on
^-cylinder engines as a substitution of the fan air
pump normally used on some 6-cylinder and 8-cyllnder
engines. We have assumed that this design Is limited
to ^-cylinder engines.
46
RATH & STRONG
INCOIPOIITID
-------
IB - EXHAUST GAS RECIRCULATION SYSTEMS
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
The detailed descriptions and calculations following this page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978. The
coats shown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent casts far trucks are shown below.
1. EGR System
Automobile
Unit Cost
EOS
Factor
Material
Labor and Overhead
Equipment
Tooling
.573
1.148
.068
.209
Weighted EOS Factor
x Automobile Retail Price Equivalent
Truck Retail Price Equivalent
2.4
$7.02
$16.85
47
RATH & STRONG
-------
Exhaust gas rectrculation Is used, primarily, to lower peak
cutnbustion temperatures, and to control the formation of NOx.
NOx emission at low temperatures Is not severe; however,
o
when the temperature exceeds about 2,500 F, the production
of NOx In the combustion chamber, is rapidly accelerated
to high levels. Peak combustion temperatures can be reduced
by retarding the spark, or, by Introducing an Inert gas
such as exhaust gas to dilute the fuel mixture,
A small amount of exhaust gas is required to rapidly cool
peak combustion temperatures. Therefore, the hole in the
EGR valve Is, necessarily, very small even when open to
fu11 capaci ty.
Chrysler, at one time, had one of the simplest exhaust
recircu1 at I on systems. It Had the floor jet under the
carburetor. In this system, holes were drilled Into the
bottom of the intake manifold; then, calibrated jets were
screwed Into the holes. These holes penetrated the exhaust
cross-over passage, allowing exhaust gases to enter the
Intake manifold constantly. The difficulty Inherent In
that system was exhaust gas reelrcu1 a11 on at !dle speeds.
This was not only unnecessary for proper emissions control;
but, unnecessarily caused rough idling engines. Most
Chrysler engines now use a separate EGR valve, similar to
thoss employed by all other manufacturers.
48
RATM * STRONG
INCOBPOMTKI!
-------
rom
EGR valves are normally mounted on the Intake manifoVd. When
the valve opens, exhaust gases are allowed to pass usually fi
the crossover passage Into the throat under the carburetor. The
EGR valve is vacuum operated, by intake manifold vacuum on some
engines, and by ported vacuum on others^
The porred vacuum systems are the simplest. At Idle speeds, the
port is avove the throttle blade, keeping the EGR valve closed.
When the throttle is opened, vacuum acts on the port, and, the
EGR valve opens. At full throttle, there Is no Intake manifold
vacuum. This closes the EGR valve, giving the engine maximum power.
The EGR valve, on some vehicles, is operated by intake manifold
vacuum. These valves use an amplifier in the circuit. The
amplifier, which is controlled by venturi vacuum, operates the
valve. A small hole In the carburetor venturi picks up vacuum,
when the airflow through the carburetor is sufficient enough, arid,
sends the vacuum signal to the amplifier. The amplifier then opens,
to allow manifold vacuum to act on the EGR valve. This amplifier
system Is used to obtain precise timing of EGR valve operations;
additionally, exhaust' reel rcul a t i on does not commence, until
engine speed is considerable above idle.
49
RATH A STRONG
INBOIPQIATED
-------
However, thes* system*, w*r« found to be sensitive to outside
air temperatures as well; and, were discontinued after March 15, 1973,
as a result of the EPA
Ford uses a temperature control which resembles a PVS valve, «xcept
that it has two nozzles. This control shuts off the vacuum, to
the EG^ v,i , ve , at low temperatures.
When Chrysler stopped 1 ocat Ing- the I r air temperature sensor within
the plenum chanber, they began using a valve, similar to Ford's,
except mounted In the radiator. The Chrysler valve has two nozzles,
with a hose connected to onet and a foam fi 1 te r on the other. At
low temperatures the valve opens, allowing air to enter. This
weakens the vacuum, thus keeping the EGR valve c-osed.
Bulck has changed their EGR temperature regulation considerably.
In 1972, they did not use a temperature control. In 1973 models,
they used a temperature switch, located in the hose that shut off
the vacuum to the EGR valve, at low temperatures. This switch was
sensitive to engine compartment temperature, and was judged to
be a defeat device by EPA. By March 15, 1973, Bulck changed the
switch to a coolant temperature switch, working with a vacuum
solenoid. At low temperatures, this coolant switch caused the
solenoid to shut off the vacuum to the EGR valve. In 197^,
By I ck eliminated the electric components in their system, and
employed a straight coolan t-vacuum switch, closing off the vacuum
to the EGR valve, at low engine temperatures.
50
RATH A STRONG
IMCOUPdllATED
-------
Cadillac used a switch in the hose similar to Buick's first switch.
After March 15. 1973, they enclosed the switch in a housing; so that,
it was more sensitive to engine temperature, rather than underhood
temperature,
Chevrolet does not use temperature control for their EGR system.
This is surprising, considering all other General Motors divisions
do use a tempereture control. Ofdsmobile uses a mechanical
temperature control valve In the hose to the EGR valve, similar
to what Cadillac usas.
Ponciac probably has the most complicated system of all. Before
March 15, 1973» the EGR system was tied in with the transmission
control spark system. The two systems were hooked together,
so that, when vacuum spark advance was allowed, there was no EGR,
When EGR was allowed, there was no vacuum spark advance. This
complicated system was eliminated on March 15, 1973; and, from
then.on, the EGR and the transmission control spark systems were
s epa ra te.
51
RATM A STRONG
INeHRPOIATED
-------
ECR Systems
CARBURETOR
THROTTLE VALVE
CALIBRATED
CARBURETOR
SIGNAL PORT
EGR VALVE
.^.::,:.^...^.W..,3 .
„ INTAKi /*
INTAKi
MANIFOLD
EXHAUST GAS
Mott can ui* a* ES* tytttm vrth a »iNt n*i i portvd vteuum i«nal. at Ihown htr«. $omt tin
UM vtnturi »icuum mnfi i M0«rit« ampiidtr ID op*r«c ttM »»l»t
.I.
t0x.x^ % \ f-jriXfi
'-rS ~*/^:?-t ' • i-7" !^—«
t'-rS ~*/:?- ' • i-7" ^—«i
J I LJs^-i _ 3
of • tysie>l Ctnetil Moton t&M vMvt. Tlit
rt k.m-'ji
52
RATH & STRONG
IMCBIPDIATCO
-------
ECR Systems
VALVI HAT
VALVI CMAMIIR
^ MCUM W*
^^Xi^ t»i»»c"i» 'o
, > "•*«.» »JOM
iHHOl
[SM nhi* craw wetter
Dual di*phr*fm tCM «•)«• urai
*c* TO K*
CO-mOt.
VAWl ¥AW£
TO DISTtlSUTOt
IQR TMIMMM. VACUUM
ViLVI
B»OSIO TO BtKAUST
CAS MlSSutt
Exfwmt toek pnuun trtrodutv.
teck prmura tr>n>4u«ar. OMsmetxi*
RATH A STRONG
INCtlRPOMTtO
-------
ECR Systems
BILL OF MATERIAL
MANUFACTURING
Part
ECR Valve Assy
/*
Diaphragm Cover
I
Diaphragm Spn^
Valve i Large Dia. f* -"•••••.
Position J .
Actuator \ Diaphra^r
Small «. "... rsstori
Vac, tVti--.: Conn,
S*ai
Vsive Shaft
Valva
Va'vt Seat
EGR Vf.lvc Adaptor
Hoses
Caskets
Exhaust B.P.
Transducer
Valve Cover
Filtssr .
Spring
Piston
Probe-
Total
Material
Assem.
Steel
„.«.«;
£i*«.
Kubb.--
St.?o{
V.
.TOO
.050
.100
.050
.050
1.320
.050
.030
.304
.064
.060
.060
.020
.100
Mat
Costs
-
.0400
S2CO
.oieo
,0200
,0180
,0200
, 0200
,0200
.0250
,0250
.2260
,2640
.0100
.0120
,2850
-
.0128
.0120
.0120
.0040
.0200
.0608
COSTS
Labor
.1250
1250
.0625
.0312
.0156
.0312
-0156
.0156
.0312
.0156
.0156
.4841
.0625
.0156
.0156
.0937
.1250
.0156
.0156
.0156
.0078
.0625
.2421
Labor Mfg
Overhead Costs
.0500 .1750
•s
.0500 .2150
.0250 .1075
.0125 .0617
.0062 .0418
.0125 .0617
.0062 .0418
.0062 .0418
^
.0125 .0637
.0062 .0468
.0062 .0468
.1935 .9036
.0250 .3515
.0062 .0318
.0062 .0338
.0374 .4171
.0500 .1750
.0062 .(3346
.0062 .0338
.0062 .0338
.0031 .0149
.0250 .1075
.0967 .3996
1.7203
Reference
17053105
or
17052364
$18.05
^ .5713
33% of
Total MC
416499
551083
54
RATH A STRONG
-------
ECR System
BILJL OF MATERIAL
Mat Labor Mfg
Part Material Weight Costs Labor Overhead Costs Reference
Vehicle Assem - .2500 .1000 ..1500
Engine Mod. - - .0625 .0250 .0875
Total Vehicle 2.1578
Installation
55
RATH & STRONG
INCOCPOHATIO
-------
Systems--Tooting Cost5--AmortlgatlonPer Part
JJ
^
z
* o\
CO
-4
3D
0
Z
D
I
Part
ECR Valve Assy
Diaphragm Cover
Diaphragm Spring
Large Dia. Piston
Diaphragms
Small Dla. Piston
Vac. Tube Conn.
Seal
Valve Shaft
Valve
Va!ve Seat
ECR Vive Adaptor
Hoses
Caskets
Economic
Volume
1,000,000
2,000,000
5,000,000
2. GOO, 000
5,000,000
2,000,000
4,000,000
4,000,000
4,000,000
5,500,000
5,000,000
1,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
1 Year
Recurring
Tooling
.0200
20,000
.0050
10,000
.0020
10,000
.0025
5,000
.0050
25,000
.0025
5,000
.0025
10,000
.0025
10,000
.0050
20.000
.0040
20,000
.0040
20.000
.0550
.0200
20,000
.0040
20,000
.0040
20,000
3 Year Non-
Recurrirtg
Tooling
.0200
60, 000
.0050
30,000
.0020
30,000
.0050
30,000
.0040
60.000
.0050
30,000
.0010
12,000
.0025
30,000
.0025
30,000
.0020
30.000
.0020
30.000
.0510
.0100
30,000
.0017
25.000
,001?
25,000
12 Year
Machinery
E Equip
.0100
120.000
.0025
60,000
.0010
60,000
.0015
36.000
.0010
60,000
.0015
36.000
.0005
24,000
.0012
60,000
.0025
120,000
.0020
120,000
.0020
120.000
.0257
.0100
120,000
.0025
150,000
.0025
150,000
12 Year
Launching
Costs
.0010
12.000
.0002
6,000
.0001
6,000
.0002
3,600
. 0001
6,000
.0002
3,600
.0000
2,400
.0001
6,000
.0003
12,000
.0002
12,000
.0002
12,000
.0026
.0010
12,000
.0002
15,000
.0002
15,000
40 Year Amortization
Land £ Per
Buildings Piece
.0510
.0127
.0051
.0092
.0101
.0092
.0040
.0063
.0102
.0082
.0082
.1343
.0410
.0084
.0084
.0578
-------
ms^^^ffi^fy^-n^^eixassfaseaM-K'.t
9.2 LGK Systems
Part
Exh BP Transducer
Valve Cover
Filter
Spring
Piston
(||^Ipf4Jy«LH,IIJ,g
Tooling Custs--Amorli/ation Per Part
1 Year
Economic Recurring
Volume Tooling
.0200
1,000,000 20,000
.0050
2,000.000 10.000
.0050
2,000,000 10,000
.0020
5,000.000 10,000
.0025
2,000,000 5.000
3 Year Non-
Recurrlng
Tooling
.0100
30,000
.0050
30.000
.0050
30.000
.0020
30,000
.0050
30.000
(Continued)
12 Year
Machinery
C Equip
.0050
60,000
.0025
60,000
.0015
36,000
.0010
60,000
.00)5
36,000
12 Year
Launching
Costs
.0005
6,000
.ooo2
6,000
. 0002
3,600
.0001
6,000
.0002
3,600
wwvsBajwscTrwFrn ff^^wmavms^ff^^ff^lSIHI
tO Year Amortization
Land I Per
Buildings Piece
.0355
.0127
.0) 17
.0051
.0092
.07«i2
Vehicle Assem
Engine Mod
Total EGR System
on Vehicle
.0333
300,000 10,000
.0667
300,000 20,000
.0667
60.000
.0667
60.000
.0167
60,000
.0333
120,000
.0317
6,000
.0031
12,000
.1183
. 1 700
.55*16
RtD Estimate: 500,000 for 2 years, or $1.11 per vehicle for a 3-year payback.
-------
ECR System
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
Part
Plant Plant
Over- Mfg
Mat Labor Head Costs
Tooling
Exp. Iny.
.20MC Mfg/
,20MC Co^p Vendor
Corp Profit Costs
ECR Valve
ECR Valve
Adaptor
.2260 .1841 .1935
.2640 .0625 .0250
Hoses 6 Caskets .0220 .0312 .0124
BP Transducer ,0608 .2U21 .0967
.9036
.3515
.0656
.3996
.10iO ,C2§3 .1807 .1807 1.3S95
.0300 .0110 .0703 .0703 .5331
0113 .0' ok .0131 .0131 . i 195
.0615 .31*7 ,0799 .0799 .&33$
Total Vehscle .5728
Mfg Costs
1.1475
.2088 .0684
2.6357
58
RATH A STRONG
INCaiPOHATID
-------
ECR Systems
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
AT THE VEHICLE LEVEL
Part
EGR Valve
EGR Adaptor
Hoses &
Caskets
BP Transducer
Vehicle Assem
Engine Mod
Total Vehicle
Price Equivalent
Plant Tools
Vendor &
Costs R&D Equip
1.3995 1.1111
.5331
.1195
.6336
.3500 - .1>33
.0875 .1700
Corp.
Alloc.
. 2 VC
-279?
. 1056
.0239
. 1267
. 0700
.0175
Corp. Dealer
Profit Markup
•> vc .uvc
.2.739 .5593
.1066 .2132
.0233 .047C
.1267 .253*
.0700 . UOO
.0175 .0350
Vehicle
Retail Price
Equivalent
3.6302
.9596
,2151
1 . 1405
.7*33
.3275
7.0212
59
RATH * STRONG
IkCQBPnilATCO
-------
ECR System ^
Cost Comparison to AftermarketSelling Price
Using the aftermarket discount data and the aftermarket felling price,
the following analysis is projected;
Chilton
Aftermarket
Selling Price
18.05
1.51
3.61
Refsr6n.ee
17052364
or
17013105
ECR Valve
Discount 1M
Discount 1/5
The estimated vendor costs arel . 3935and the vehicle retail price
equivalent is3. 6302 . This figure includes $1.11 of RsD allocation.
60
RATH A STRONG
INCUIPOIATEtl
-------
EGR System--Cost Methodo logy
The weight data were obtained from tne Oldsmobile computer
printout. The material costs are compiled using the 1977 AMM
mill p rI essi
The labor costs are estimates of production costs using today's
technology and the assumed economies of scale. The overhead
data are from a company communication. The tooling costs are
estimates of expendable tools, fixtures, and dies, as well
as estimates of equipment and machinery, to produce the components.
It was assumed that no new buildings were required to produce
these parts.
The vehicle assembly costs and the engine changes were included
in the costs at the vehicle level.
EGR System-~App1 Icatlon of the Systems
Many domestic vehicles have engines equipped with an EGR
valve similar to the design used in the estimate. The
various applications to engines are numerous, due to
the differences In locations in the k, 6, and 8 cylinder
engines. The hoses will vary due to the differences in
1 oca t i ons.
61
RATH A STRONG
INCeiPBIATtD
-------
1C - CATALYTIC CONVERTERS
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE TRUCKS
GENERAL
For clarity of presentation, the various catalytic converters have been grouped
into two major categories. Monolithic and Pelleted.
The Monolithic ones are;
Monolithic Oxidation Converters
Monolithic Reduction Converters
Monolithic Three-way Converters
Monolithic Start-up Converters
These are all similar physically, being cylindrical in configuration. They differ
primarily only in their catalytic reagents. There can be different sizes, or
capacities, in each type.
The Pelleted ones are;
Pelleted Oxidation Converters
Pelleted Reduction Converters
Here, also, the physical configurations are similar—a flat pan-shcped
enclosure. The noble metals are different, and each can vary in size.
The cost estimations quoted herein were calculated primarily by applying
appropriate economy-of-scale factors to those costs estimated in detail and
presented in the previous report on cars, EPA - 460/3 - 78 - 002. Costs are in
1977 dollars.
62
RATH A STRONG
INCOHPOHATCO
-------
OXIDIZING CATALYTIC CONVERTERS
The oxidation of HC and CO in the exhaust stream can be accomplished at lower
temperatures than the thermal reactor by using an appropriate catalyst. The
catalyst is contained in a casing which directs the exhaust flow through the
catalyst bed and protects the catalyst from mechanical damage. Compared with
a thermal reactor, a catalytic converter can be placed further from the engine.
Catalytic converters require the use of fuels with very low levels of lead,
phosphorus, and sulphur; small amounts of these contaminants lead to rapid
deterioration of catalyst performance.
The catalyst consists of a thin layer of active material deposited on an inert
support material. The catalytically active material is usually a noble metal such
as platinum or a combination of transition metal oxides.
To obtain effective performance as rapidly as possible after engine start—up, the
density of the support material is kept as low as is practical.
There are two basic configurations for the support material in oxidizing catalytic
converters:
(1) Pellets of Alumina
(2) Monolithic Honeycombs of Alumina
63
RATH & STRONQ
-------
MONOLITHIC CONVERTERS
Monolithic Oxidizing Catalyst
The monolithic oxidizing catalyst converter consists of a noble metal wash coat
on a ceramic or paper substrate mounted in an insulated metal container
supported by a wire mesh screen. This construction is usually mounted close to
the exhaust manifold ahead of the fire wall as an integral part of the exhaust
pipe (either the Y-pipe or the straight pipe that connects to the muffler).
Its function is to convert the HC and CO gases to hLO and CO, in the exhaust
system.
A 63 cubic inch unit is used as a base to develop the detailed cost estimations.
Such a unit is used on 6-cylinder, 250 cubic inch California cars. Costs for other
sizes can be estimated according to the formulae presented.
ftft nwnstKhie wvtrtrr—cuU
(C Fort Uttar CcJ
64
RATH & STRONB
IMCORPdRATED
-------
MANIFOLD CONVERTER
63 cu. In. substrate volume
i
A. 00 DLA
NOTE:
ALL DIMS>3S1ONS
ARE IN INCHES
R1NG-2 PLACtS
METAL MESH
SHELL ASM
SUBSTRATE-
CATALYST
COATED (Upper)
SUBSTRATE-
CATALYST 9.64
COATED (Lower)
METAL MESH
RATH & STRONQ
EXHAUST
OUTLET
-------
MONOLITHIC OXIDIZING CATALYTIC CONVERTER, 63 CU. IN. SUBSTRATE
Specifications!
A. Catalyst Supplier: Washcoat and Active Material Applied by:
AC Spark Plug Division Engelhard Mineral and Chemical Corp.
1300 N. Dort Highway 529 Delancy Street
Flint, M! 48566 Newark, New Jersey 07105
B, Number of converters used per vehicle: One
C. General Type; Oxidation
D. General Location; Attached to exhaust manifold
E. Substrate
1. Configuration; Monolith
2. Construction Technique: Extruded
3. Composition: Major phase - Cordierite
Minor phase - Mullite
4. Supplier: AC Spark Plug
1300 N. Dort High*ay-
Flint, MI 48556
F. Washcoat: Alumina
G. Active Material:
1. Composition - Platinum and Palladium in 5,2 ratio
2. Total Loading - .029 troy 02.
66
RATH A STRONG
INCO«»DH»TI:O
-------
H. Container:
1-2 See Schematic
3 Volume - 2100 ml
4-6 The container is constructed of steel by forming and welding. The
monolith is contained by metal mesh.
7 Canner; Af: bp^r'' plug
8 (a) Insulations None
(b) Shielding: None
I. Physical Description (of substrate)
1. Dimensions: 2 pieces 3.66" diameter x 3" long
2. Weight: 1.9 Ibs. (Modified to 1.3 per Corning Glass data)
3. Volume: 63 cu. in.
4. Total Surface Area (BET): 10.300M2
2
5. Approximate Active Surface Area: 8,900M
67
RATH a STRONG
IMCOHPailATCO
-------
Monolithic Oxidizing Catalyst, 63 cu. in. substrate
BILL OF MATERIAL
MANUFACTURING COSTS
Part
Converter Assem
Shell
Ring
Inlet Cone
Outlet Cone
Inlet Pipe
Flanges
Mesh
Hardware
Substrate
Washcoat
Sub Total
Platinum
Paladium
Total
Vehicle Assem
Body Modification
Total Vehicle
Material
Assem
409 S3
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
Steel
Ceramic
AL2°3
Platin.
Palad.
-
-
(63 cu. in.
Weight
7.800
2.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
.250
.150
.100
1.300
.02075 T. oz
.0083 T. 02
-
-
volume)
Mat
Costs
—
1.08
.54
.54
.54
.54
.14
.08
.03
6.32
.81
10.62
3.46
.57
14.65
_
-
14.65
Labor
.68
.17
.08
.08
.08
.08
.04
.04
.04
.34
.17
1.80
.06
.03
1.89
.13
.13
2.15
Labor
Overhead
.27
.07
.03
.03
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.14
.07
.73
.03
.01
.77
.05
.05
.87
Mfg.
Costs
.95
1.32
.65
.65
.65
.65
.20
.14
.09
6.80
1.05
13.10
3.55
.61
17,, 31
.18
.18
17.67
68
RATH & STRONG
INCOMOHATfO
-------
Monolithic Oxidation Catalyst—Tooling Costs—Amortization Per Piece
(VOLUME AND $ INVESTED EXPRESSED IN THOUSANDS)
1 Year 3 Year Non- 12 Year 12 Year
30
H
I I
n n-
s *S
s 2
5 H
3 o
z
0
Part
Converter Assem
Shell
Ring
Inlet Cone
Outlet Cone
Inlet Pipe
Flanges
Mesh
Hardware
Subtotal
Substrate
Washcoat
Platinum
Paladium
Subtotal
Vehicle Assem
Body Modification
Total
Volume
50
50
100
50
50
50
100
50
250
50
50
50
50
50
50
Recurring
Tooling
.30
15
.30
15
.07
7.5
,15
7.5
.15
7.5
,15
7.5
.05
5.0
.15
7.5
.01
2.5
1.33
.30
15
.10
5
.10
5
.10
5
.60
,30
15.3
.03
1.5
Recurring
Tooling
.30
45
.30
45
.05
15
.10
15
.10
15
.10
15
.04
11
.10
15
.01
8
1.10
.30
45
.10
15
.10
15
.10
15
.60
.30
46
.03
5
Machinery
& Equip
.08
50.4
.08
50.4
.01
16.8
.03
16.8
.02
16.8
.03
16,8
.01
7.C
.03
16. B
.01
8.4
.31
.13
84
.05
33.6
.05
33.6
.05
33.6
.28
.23
136.8
.02
13.7
Launching
Costs
.01
5.0
.01
5.0
-
1.7
.01
1.7
—
1.7
_
1.7
-
O.B
_
1.7
.
0.8
.03
.01
8.4
.01
3.4
.01
3.4
.01
3.4
.04
.02
13.7
_
1.4
40 Year Amortization
Land & Per
Buildings Piece
.01 .70
500
.69
.13
.29
.28
,28
.10
.28
.03
.01 2.78
.74
.26
.26
.26
1.52
.85
.08
5.23
-------
Monolithic Oxidization Catalyst, 63 cu- in.
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
(63 cu. in. vol.)
Part
Converter
Assem
Converter Can
Substrate
Total
Mat
-
3.49
11.16
14.65
Labor
.68
.61
,60
1.B9
Plant
Over-
Head
.27
.25
.25
.77
Plant
Mfg
Costs
.95
4.35
12.01
17.31
Tooling
Exp. Inv,
.60
1.83
1.20
3.63
09
23
32
64
.20 MC
Corp
.19
.87
2.40
3.46
.20MC
Corp
Profit
.19
.87
2.40
3.46
Mfg/
Vendor
Costs
2.02
8.15
18.33
28.50
70
RATH A STRONG
THCaUPQUATCO
-------
Monolithic Oxidation Catalyst, 63 cu. in.
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
Part
Converter
Assem
Converter Can
Substrate
AT THE
Plant Tools
Vendor &.
Cosls R&D Equip
2.02 4.00
8.15
18.33
VEHICLE LEVEL
Corp
.2 VC
Alloc
.46
1.63
3.67
Corp
.2 VC
Profit
.40
1.63
3.67
Dealer
.4 MC
Markup
.80
3.26
7.34
Vehicle
Retail Price
Equivalent
7.62
14.67
33.01
55.30
Vehicle Assem
Body Mod.
Total Vehicle
Price Equivalent
.30 - .85
.30 - .08
.06
.06
.06
.06
.12
.12
1.39
,62
57.31
71
RATH A STRONQ
INCORPORATED
-------
Monolithic Oxidation Catalyst—63 cu. in. Cost Methodology
The weight data were obtained from the EPA and Chrysler data base. The
material costs were computed using 1977 AMM mill prices.
The labor costs are estimates of protection costs using today's technology and
assumed volume of 50,000 per year.
The tooling costs are estimates of expendable fixtures, dies, and molds. The
machinery and equipment are separate estima'.^g based on 1977 costs of rew
equipment.
Some new building expenditures were included in the estimates since no prior
capacity existed to produce the ceramic substrates.
Some modifications to the body structure were included in the estimates of labor
and tooling.
72
RATH A STRONG
iNCOIPOMATEO
-------
CALCULATION SHEET FOR
PLANT MANUFACTURING COST
AND RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
OF MONOLITHIC CATALYTIC CONVERTERS
FORM A
DATA:
Pt/P- Ratio
(Pt+P ) Portion
LOADING
CCM/PT3)
+
1728
X
VOLUME
(IN.3)
e
TOTAL
CRAMS
Pl/R?% Ratio
(Pt*R J Portion
r CATALYTIC COMPONENTS
' '• -«•
[STRUCTURAL
COMPONENTS
Msttria!
Platinum
Rhodium
Palladium
Pro-
por-
tions
Rhenium !
Ruthenium '
Nickel
•
Total Crams
Labor I O.H.
Crams
_l£S^-
Price
per
G»"8fn
5.369
14.621
2.220
1.709
2.009
.605
—
X'.IH *
Plant Manufacturing Cost
Plant Manufacturing Cost *
$4.05 * .144 x volume
TOTAL PLANT MANUFACTURING COST
$
per
Un?!_
«-.
$
I
$
2.S2
*
$13.75
s
R.P.E
S
73
RATH & STRONG
INCOimiATIO
-------
Monolithic Oxidation Catalyst--Application of the Systems
Refer to the enclosed schematic which illustrates the locations by engine type.
TYPICAL INSTALLATIONS CATALYTIC CONVERTER
I X
n
1 *
2 n
M
z
IN-LINE ENGINE V-8 ENGINE
SINGLE CONVERTER SINGLE CONVERTER
V-8 ENGINE
TWO CONVERTERS
V-8 ENGINE
SINGLE CONVERTER
¥\
CATALYTIC CONVERTER
ALTERNATE DUAL
EXHAUST
UtTERNATI: OUAt
EXHAUST
-------
MONOLITHIC OXIDIZING CATALYTIC CONVERTERS - SIZE GRADUATIONS
FORMULAE FOR MANUFACTURING COST AND RETAIL PRICE
EQUIVALENT ESTIMATIONS OF MONOLITHIC CATALYTIC CONVERTERS
Form A. attached, is, in effect) an equation relating noble metal composition,
loadingi and volume to manufacturing cost and retail price equivalent.
Form A applies to:
a. Monolithic oxidation catalysts.
b. Monolithic reduction Catalysts.
c. Monolithic 3-way catalysts.
d. Monolithic start catalysts.
Derivation of the Form A equation for plant manufacturing costs.
Catalytic components—plant manufacturing costs.
Grams of each ingredient are precisely defined when proportions,
volume, and loading are specified.
Prices are based on 1977 published quotations:
Platinum (Pt) $167./Troy oz.
Rhodium (Rh) $455./Troy oz.
Palladium (Pd) $ 69./Troy oz.
Rhenium (Re) $ 53./Troy oz.
Ruthenium (Ru) $ 62./Troy oz.
Nickel (Ni) $2.23/lb.
Copper (Cu) $0.75/lb.
Labor and overhead, $.14/gram, is used as a constant! taken from the
63 cuoic Inch converter previously estimated in detail. (See Appendix
A for detail calculations)
75
RATM A STRONS
-------
Structural components—plant manufacturing costs.
The preceding estimate for the 63 cubic inch oxidizing catalytic
converter is used as the base for graduations to other sizes.
To conform with the imposed maximums on diameter and length, 6"
and 24" respectively, two diameters have been incorporated. For
volumes up to 150 cubic inches, a 4" diameter shell is specified:
above 150 cubic inches up to 400 cubic inches, a 5.4 inch diameter is
specified (Work sheets appended)
76
RATH Ot STRONG
-------
Other variations of these dimensions would have minimal effect on
the final costs.
The weights of the individual structural components of the basic 63
cubic inch unit were extrapolated on the geometrical ratios
applicable to other volumes. These ratios were (where D = Diameter,
L = Length, and V = Volume):
2
Shell - (D x L) + ( 5-)
Rings - D ; (one per 5" length)
Inlet Cone - D
Outlet Cone - D
Inlet Pipe - D
Flanges - D
Mesh - D x L
Hardware - D
Substrate - V
Wash Coat - V
Material costs per pound were maintained as used in the basic unit.
Labor costs for the components were computed on the generalized
relationship that the rate of change of labor input is 60% that of the
rate of change of weight, algebraically expressed;
L, W? W7
— = 1 + 0.6 ( — - 1) > 0.4 + 0.6 —
4 Wl Wl
Lsbor overhead held consistent at 40%.
Plant manufacturing cost is the sum of material cost, labor cost, and
labor overhead.
77
RA7H A STRONS
INCOXPOKATtD
-------
Using the above guides, the plant manufacturing costs for seven sizes
were calculated: (Work sheets appended) Results were:
Volume (In j Plant Manufacturing Cost
10 $ 5,42
63 (Basic) 13.15
100 18.25
150 25.68
200 33.31
250 39.87
300 47.42
400 61.48
Applying linear regression, a best-fit line was found.
Plant Manufacturing Cost = $4.05 + ($.144 x Volume)
A graph, appended, of the data points and the best-fit line indicates
the error band around the line.
(See Appendix B for details)
Derivation of the Form A equation for converting plant manufacturing
to the Retail Price Equivalent.
The equation is:
Retail Price Equivalent = (Plant Manufacturing Cost x 2.52) + $13.75
The cost elements added to convert from plant manufacturing cost to retail
price equivalent are:
78
RATH A STRONG
IN=ORPD««TID
-------
Plant
Manufacturing
Cost
Expense Tooling
Plus Investment Tooling
Vendor G & A
Vendor Profit
Equals Vendor Cost
$3.63
.64
20% of Mfg. Cost
20% of Mfg. Cost
1.4 (P.M.C.) + $4.27
Vendor Cost Plus
R&D
Vehicle Assembly
Body Modification
Vehicle Corp G & A
Vehicle Corp Profit
Dealer Markup
4.00
1.39
.62
20% of Vendor Cost
20% of Vendor Cost
40% of Vendor Cost
Equals
Retail Price Equivalent
1.8 (V.C.) * $6.06
= 1.8 (1.4 M.C.+ 4.23) $6.06
= 2.52 (M.C.) + $13.75
79
RATH & STRONG
IKCO«»O»iTIO
-------
Monolithic Reduction Catalyst (as a function of volume, noble metal
loading and compostion)
Reduction of nitric oxide in the exhaust gas in the presence of carbon monoxide
and hydrogen can be accomplished with a suitable catalyst at typical exhaust-gas
temperatures.
The catalyst is usually made up of a small mass of active material such as nobla
metal or a combination of transition and non-transition metals deposited on
thermally stable support materials such as alumina. To prevent loss in catalytic
activity due to mechanical damage, small spheric pellets or a honeycomb
(monolithic structure) have been found the most suitable geometries. The
catalyst ia contained in a metal casing designed to direct the exhaust flow
M
through the caralyst bed. Self-supporting metallic catalysts are also being
developed.
For high conversion efficiency throughout the test cycle, the catalyst must
attain its "light-off temperature* as soon as possible after engine start-up.
Considerable development work has, therefore, been done to reduce the density
of the support material and increase the surface area of the active components.
To maintain high catalytic activity with many of the catalysts being developed,
the fuels employed must be low in concentration of various catalyst poisons such
as lead, phosphorus, and sulfur.
i
Because maximum NO reduction occurs in a reducing atmosphere, the reducing
converter must be placed upstream cf the final oxidation catalyst or reactor, and
the engine must be operated with a fuel-rich fuel-air mixture.
Same calculation as for oxidizing catalyst, except for loading.
*The temperature at which the catalyst becomes effective.
60
RATH A STRONQ
INCOHPOtATC®
-------
Monolithic Three-Way Catalyst (as a function of volume, noble metal loading
and composition.)
When the exhaust gas composition is close to stoichiometric (just enough air is
present in the fuel-air mixture to fully burn the fuel) the simultaneous removal
of HC, CO, and NO can be achieved with a suitable catalyst material. These
catalysts are similar in construction to the noble m.;tai reducing and oxidizing
catalysts. The three-way catalyst requires precise control of air-fuel ratio to
maintain high conversion efficiencies for all three pollutants.
Same calculation as for oxidizing catalyst except for loading.
31
RATH & STRONG
-------
3-WAY CATALYST EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM
EXHAUST GAS JUClflCUiaTIOH
v
CD a
3.^^=^^*. CLOSED LOOP CARBURETOR
^\-i^*§i£
-^: -Vi^^f^^ELECTRONIC
••-.. »j A'f •-?^?Tiv-^s< . J «|CH ««»GY
IGMITION
V^~-7STk--. »• A:f^'-'*>iiJ|_-^'t-1"
/c%j-:^^
l;!: H i.tY^ ' *» j J) ---.iL^--***^
v«iX.. ! '^.!• \\/^J;x^-"*" iLs***'*!
EXHAUST OXYGEN SENSOR
./
NOl REDUCING
AND HC-CO
OXIDIZIIIG COHVCRTEI
CARBON CAHISTtR
FUNCTiOMAI. SCHEMATIC
AIR now
CLOSED
THROTUC
SIGNAL
3-WAY
CONVERTER
OXYGEN SENSOR
HP—
,/
SCIISOR SIGIIALS
-------
Monolithic Start-up Catalyst
The start-up catalyst, or the warm-up catalyst, is designed to provide
catalytic conversion during the first two minutes of the engine warm up. It
is during this period (quick light off) that major emissions of HC + CO are
created. The start catalyst is designed to provide conversion at 400 degrees
F or less while the main catalyst is still heating up. These catalysts were
provided for California cars where standaro formula HC + CO + NOx was
more stringent than the Federal standard.
Same calculation as for oxidizing catalysts, except for loading.
83
RATH & STRONG
INCQRPCRATtD
-------
WARM-UP CATALYST DESCRIPTION*
AMC (California) used on 304 and 360 cu. in. engines
Catalyst Features, such ssi
a) Catalyst supplier and address: Engelhard Industries Division
(Sole supplier)
430 Mountain Avenue
Murray Hill, New Jersey 07974
b) Number of catalysts ussd per vehicle: 1 for 6 cyl, 1 for V-8 Hornet/Pacer
2 for V-8 Matador
c) General Type: Oxidation
d) General Location: At exhaust manifold
e) Substrate:
(i) Configuration - Monolithic, segmented
(ii) 'Jonstruction Technique - Extruded
(iii) Composition - Corderile
(iv) Supplier and Address: Corning Glass Works Division
(Sole supplier)
Corning, New York
f) Washcoat: Stabilized activated coating proprietory to manufacturer
g) Active Material:
(i) Composition of active constituents - Pt/Pd - 2/1
(ii) Total active material loading (gms. or Troy oz.) - 50 gm/ft.
h) Container:
(i) Configuration - Cylindrical
(ii) Dimensions - 3.87 dia. x 6.6 overall length
(iii) Volume - 48,8 In.3
(iv) Materials used - 409 Stainless .054" min.
(v) Technique of containment & restraint - Compliant wire mesh
Mounting rings
(vi) Cannen Maremont Corporation
(Sole supplier)
250 East Kehoe Boulevard
Carol Stream, Illinois 60187
(viii) Insulation and shielding (catalyst and/or vehicles) - None
84
RATH & STRONG
INCOMt»i3»AT''.a
-------
J) Physical Description:
(i) Dimensions: 2 pieces, 3.66 dia. x 1.25j (3.31 EFF dia.)
(ii) Weight (Ibs): Catalyst only, 0.61 Ibs. (Modified to .53 Ibs.
per corning Glass Data)
(iii) Volume; EFF Catalyst 21.5 In.3, Total - 26.3 In.
(iv) Active surface area (BET): Proprietary to manufacturer
j) Catalyst Assembly Part Number: To be supplied
85
RATH & STRONQ
-------
TWC Catalytic Converter Assembly
SUBSTRATE EXHAUST
CONVER10R CATALYST
f HC/CO)
AIR MANIFOLD
ASSY, (SPACER)
SUBSTRATE EXHAUST
CONVERTER CATALYST
(TWO
%=
SUPPORT
SECONDARY AIR
INLET FITTING
SUPPORT
SHELL ASSY.
86
RATH a STRONG
INCO«PO«ATEO
-------
PELLETED CONVERTERS
PELLETED OXIDIZING CATALYST
The pelleted oxidizing catalyst converter consists of alumina pellets which hava
wash-coated with noble metals packed in a metal container which is in turn
encased in an insulated outer metal shell.
This construction, resembling a flat pan, is generally mounted beneath the floor
board in the exhaust stream. Its function is to convert the HC and CO gasses to
HO and
A 260 cu. in. bed volume unit is used as a base to develop the detailed cost
estimates.
Cost for other sizes are estimated according to the formulae given. The
methodology used in developing these formulae is analagous to that described in
detail under Monolithic Converters.
87
RATH & STRONG
INCOIFOIATCD
-------
UNDERFLOOR CONVERTER - FULL FLOW
260 CU. IN. BID VOLUME
WEIGH? '- 26.2 LBS.
INSULATION
\ OUTER
18.70
CONVERTED SHIU
BCD SUPPORT
7.50 DIA
'•INLET CAS
•CATALYTIC PKLITT
m
RATH A STRONC3
INCOBPOltATCD
-------
EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS
mm
CQNVlITEt SHELL
CATALYST
&TE£l COVtR
CERAMIC fELT STAINLESS STEEL
BLANKET CATALVi', SUPPORT
AfMrtCM Malon & G*ntftt Mslan auijiic <
Tve eauiyi.c een»*nti
tin{i« tubiirtu uia jn
tin net ,UC!
ruck for td
tLtCTPOK''". 8*U*ST (CHITtQN SWtTCK
6^
KUN Vtun TO
W:? TWHSTTte POSITION
SPEED fcWITCH SOLtlOiO
M' &«t ft
mUfi dut! lubtlrctt ctla'ytt
tar *H tv
Reproduced from
best available copy.
89
RATH A STRONG
-------
Pelleted Oxidation—Catalyst 260 cu.in.
BILL OF MATERIAL
MANUFACTURING COSTS
(260 cu. in. volume)
Part
Converter Assembly
Outer Wrap
Shell
I/O Pipes
Bed Support
Insulation
Pellets
Total
Vehicle Assembly
Body Modification
Total Vehicle
Material Weiqht
Assam 26.20
409 SS 8.00
409 SS 4.00
t. f-\r\ p* f* fi, C I"l
mj? 33 Z..JU
409 SS J.ll
Fibre 1.50
Glass
Alumina 6.43
PT
.
.
Mat
Costs
-
5.36
2.68
t /"«
A. .OO
2.53
2.01
12.79
27.05
-
-
27.05
Labor
3.10
.92
.92
O"7
• L.I
.92
.03
.05
6.23
.34
.17
6.74
Labor
Overhead
1.24
.37
.37
,11
.37
.02
.02
2.50
.14
.07
2.71
Mfg
Costs
4.34
6.65
3.9?
2.06
3.82
2.08
12.86
35.78
.48
.24
36.50
90
RATH A STRONG
-------
Pelleted Oxidation Catalyst—Tooling Costs—Amortization Per Piece
(Volumes and Investment $ Expressed in 1,000s)
1 Year 3 Year Non- 12 Year
Economic Recurring Recurring Machinery
Part Volume Tooling Tooling & Equip
JJ
H
I I
n
o jp vO
2 w
" 3J
° 0
z
o
Converter Assem 50
Outer Wrap 50
Shell 50
I/O Pipes 100
Bed Support 50
Insulation 50
Pellets 50
Total Converter
Vehicle Assem 50
Body Modification 50
Total Vehicle
1.75
40
1.75
90
1.75
90
18
1
90
18
18
7
15
13
.17
.75
.35
.35
.87
.30
.49
3
540
3
540
1
270
54
3
540
54
54
13
15
37
.49
.49
.75
.17
.49
.35
.35
.09
.09
.49
2
1,600
2
1,600
1
800
160
2
1,600
240
400
10
46
17
.69
.69
.35
.13
.69
.40
.65
.60
.07
.05
12 Year 40 Year
Launching Land &
Costs Buildings
160
160
80
16
160
24
40
1
5
2
.27 1.62
3,200
.27
.14
.01
.27
.04
.07
.07 1.62
.01
.05
Amortization
Per
Piece
9.82
8.20
4.99
.48
8.20
1.14
1.42
34.25
,47
1.08
35.80
-------
Pelleted Oxidation Catalyst—260 cu. in.
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
(260 cu. in. volume)
Plant Plant .20 MC Mfg./
Over- Mfg. Toclinq .20 MC Corp Vendor
Part Mat Labor Head Costs Exp. Inv. Corp Profit Costs
Converter - 3.10 1.24 4.34 5.24 4.58 .87 .87 15.90
Assembly
Converter 14.26 3.08 1.24 18.58 15.02 7.99 3.72 3.72 49.03
Can
Pellets 12.79 .05 .02 12.86 .70 .72 2.57 2.57 19.42
Total 27.05 6.23 2.50 35.70 20.96 13.29 7.16 7.16 84.35
92
RATH & STRONG
INCBHPO«AT»
-------
Pelleted Oxidation Catalyst—260 cu. in.
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
AT THE VEHICLE LEVEL
(260 cu. in, volume)
Plant Toots Corp Corp Dealer Vehicle
Vendor & .2 VC .2 VC .4 VC Retail Price
Part Costs R&D Equip Alloc Profit Markup Equivalent
Converter 84.35 1.60 - 16.87 16.87 33.74 153.43
Vehicle Assembly .48 - .47 .10 .10 .20 1.35
Body Model .24 - 1.08 .05 .05 .1C 1.52
Total Vehicle
Price Equivalent 85.07 1.60 1.55 17.02 17.02 34.04 156.30
93
RATH A STRONG
INCDIPOiATCD
-------
PELLETED OXIDATION CATALYST
Cost Methodology
The weight data was obtained from the reference sketch. The pellet weight was
also obtained from the sketch. The component weights are estimated by
proportional methods.
The labor costs are estimates based on knowledge of the actual plant processes
and manning. The economy of scale was established using the General Motors
Milwaukee plant as the model.
The tooling and equipment costs are estimates using the General Motors plant as
the reference.
The vehicle assembly costs and the body changes ars added to the converter
costs at the vehicle level.
94
RATH A STRONG
IMCdRPOIATfO
-------
PELLETED CATALYTIC CONVERTERS - SIZE GRADUATIONS
SIZE GRADATION CALCULATIONS
The configuration is regarded as two rectangular boxes, one centrally located
within the other. The outer box is the housing and the inner is the catalyst.
From the referenced sketch, these dimensions for the 260 cubic inch converter
are used as basic:
Height Width Length Area Volume
Housing 3.5 12.3 18.7 677
Catalyst 1.9 10.5 13.0 362 260
In graduating the dimensions to accommodate varying volumes, the catalyst
height is held constant (to give maximum cross-flow contact and also to fit tail
pipe). Length and width of catalyst are held in the same proportion, 13.0/10.5.
The housing length is constantly 5.7 greater than the catalyst length; the width
differential is held at 1.8.
95
RATH A STRONG
INCOfcPOHATlO
-------
PELLETED CATALYTIC CONVERTERS - SIZE GRADUATIONS
FORMULAE FOR MANUFACTURING COST AND RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
ESTIMATIONS FOR PELLETED CATALYTIC CONVERTERS
Form B gives the equation relating noble metal composition, loading, and volume
to plant manufacturing cost and retail price equivalent.
It applies to:
a. Pelleted oxidation catalysts,
b. Pelleted reduction catalysts.
The calculations are based on extrapolation of the values given in the detailed
estimate made on the 260 cubic inch under-floor oxidation catalyst.
The noble metal prices and the overall logic employed are the same as presented
in the section on monolithic catalysts.
Work sheets are attached.
96
RATH & STRONG
IHCD«»a*ATI0
-------
CALCULATION SHEET FOR
PLANT MANUFACTURING COST
AND RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
PELLETED CATALYSTS
FORM B
DATA:
Pt/Pd Ratio
(Pt «• Pd) Portion
LOADING
(CM/FT3.!
+
1728
X
VOLUME
ON.3)
. X
TOTAL
CRAMS
Pt./Rh Ratio
(Pi + Rh) Portion
J-l
CATALYTIC COMPONENTS
STRUCTURAI
COMPONENTS
Material
Platinum
Rhodium
Palladium
Renium
Pro-
por-
tions
Ruthenium •
Nickel
Crams
Req'd
Total Crams
Labor t O.H.
Price
per
Cram
5.36*
U.52E
2.220
1.709
2.009
.COS
..
x .12 *
Plan! Manufacturing Cost
Plant Manufacturing Cost =
$7.97 ( .057 x volume)
TOTAL PLANT MANUFACTURING COST
$
per
Unit
—
$
$
$
Me-«Hr2BnEU*HBiH
2.S2
97
RATH & STRONG;
-------
PELLETED CATALYTIC CONVERTERS
DERIVATION OF THE FORM B EQUATION
FOR MANUFACTURING COSTS
Catalytic Components
Same as described under Monolithic Oxidizing Converters.
Structural Components
The preceding estimate for the 260 cu. in. converter is used as the base for
graduations to other sizes.
Part weights were graduated by the appropriated geometrical parameters.
Material costs per pound held constant.
Labor costs graduated at 60% of the weight graduation. Overhead constant at
40% of labor.
Manufacturing costs on 5 sizes were calculated, and on linear regression, best fit,
equation was found:
Mfg. Cost, Structural Comps. = ($.057 x vol.) + $7.97
98
RATH & STRONG
INCOHPOIIATID
-------
PELLETED CATALYSTS
DETERMINATION OF THE FORM B EQUATION FOR ESTIMATING
THE RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
The following costs must be added to plant manufacturing cost to get the vendor
cost.
Expense Tooling 20.96
Investment Tooling -13.29
Vendor G
-------
PELLETED CATALYSTS—DIMENSIONS
CATALYSTS HOUSING
Vol. Hgt. Wdth. Lgth. Area Area Vol. Hgt. Wdth. Lgth. Area Area
"55* 9
(in. ) (in.) (in.) (in.) (in. ) Ratio Ratio (in.) (in.) (in.) (in. ) Ratio
260
1.9 10.5 13.0 362
1.00 1.00 3.5 12.3 18.7 677
1.00
I Z
s »
5 -I
S ^
0
2
§
320 1.9 11.6 14.4 433
400 1.9 13.0 16.1 530
1.20 1.23 3.5 13.4 20.1 773 1.14
1.46 1.54 3.5 14.8 21.8 901 1.33
-------
Appendix A
FORMULAE FOR CALCULATION OF THE COST PER GRAM
OF CATALYTIC COMPOUNDS
Conversion Factors - Weight
The material prices are typically quoted in varying units of weight:. Herewith is
a list of factors by which to convert each to grams.
Avoirdupois pounds
Avoirdupois ounces
Troy pounds
Troy ounces
x 453.5924 = grams
x 28.3495 = grams
x 373.248 = grams
x 31.104 = grams
Conversion Factors - Volume
Cubic feet x 1728 = cubic inches
Square feet x 144 = square inches
Cost Per Gram of a Composition of Materials (Exact Method)
To calculate the compound cost in dollars per gram, use the following format:
Material
A-l
A- 2
A- 3
Quoted
Price
$ Unit
B C
Conversion
to I/Gram
Conv.
Factor $/Gram
D E
Pro-
Portion
in
Compound
F
Compound
$/Gram
H
Etc.
Total Compound
G
1.00
101
RATH « STRONG
-------
A-l, A-2, Etc. » List ingredients
B & C - Quoted $ and units in which quoted
D - Appropriate conversion factor from 1.1
E- Divide B by D
F - List proportion as decimals (10% = 0.10)
G - Sum of column F must equal 1.000
H - Multiply F by € "
J - Sum of column H equals compound cost per gram
102
RATH A STRONG
-------
Example1
What is the cost per gram of a compound which contains 2% rhemium; 0.4%
ruthenium; 3% nickel; and in which the platinum-to-rhodium ratio is 25:1?
Solution;
Rhenium
Ruthenium
Nickel
SUBTOTAL
- .020
= .004
= .030
= .054
Remainder = 1.000 - .054 = .946
Platinum
Rhodium
TOTAL
x .946 = .910
x .946 = .036
1.000
Quoted
Material
Platinum
Rhodium
Rhenium
Nickel
Price
$
167.00
455.00
775.00
2.23
Unit
T.
T.
Av
Av
02.
oz.
. ib.
. Ib.
Conversion
to $/Gram
Factor $/Gram
31.104
31.104
453.5924
453.5924
5.369
14.628
1.709
.005
Pro-
Portion
.910
.036
.020
.030
Compound
$/Gram
4.886
.527
.034
,
Total Compound
1.000
5.447
103
RATH a STRONG
INeOKQIATEO
-------
Cost per Gram of a Composition of Substrate Materials (Approximation Method)
This short-cut method) within the proportion limits proscribed, will deviate no
more than 2% from the exact method described above.
Procedure
1. Calculate the cost per gram as if platinum and rhodium were the only
ingredients (Pt t- Rh = 100%).
2. Multiply this by the proportion represented by the sum of platinum and
rhodium.
3. Add to this the product of the remaining proportion times $.67.
Example 2 (Approximate method)
What is the cost per gram of a compound which contains 2% rhenium; 0.4%
ruthenium; 3% nickel; and in which the platinum-to-rhodium ratio is 25:1?
1. Platinum 25 parts x $ 5.369 = $134.225
Rhodium 1 part x 14,628 = 14.628
Totals 26 parts $148.853
I
Cost/gram of mix .g = $5.725
2. Platinum 91.0%
Rhodium 3.6%
SUM 94.6%
.946 x $5.725 = $5.416
3. (1.000 - .946) x $.67 = $.036
4. $5.416 + $.036 = $5.452 (answer)
(Compare with $5.447 gotten by Exact Method, Example 1.)
104
RATH A STRONG
IMCO«P3»ATtO
-------
Discussion
The short-cut method is made feasible because of two factors:
a) Platinum end rhodium constitute 84.5% or more of the mixture, and
b) The unit price of these is much geater than of the other constituents.
Typical Extreme Calculation
Platinum to Rhodium = 2:1 (upper cost ratio)
Platinum 4: Rhodium = 84.5% (lower limit)
Rhenium = 5.0% (upper limit)
Ruthenium = .05% (upper limit)
Nickel = 10.0% (upper limit)
100.0%
Platinum
Rhodium
Rhenium
Ruthenium
Nickel
$5.369 x 2/3
14.628 x 1/3
Subtotal
1.709 x
2,009 x
.005 x
x .845
x .845
.050
.005
.100
= $3.025
= 4-120
$7.145
.085
= .010
.001
$7.241
Note that the last three ingredients which represented 15.5% of the total weight
added only $.096 to the subtotal cost of Platinum and Rhodium.
The short-cut formula substitutes 15.5% x $.67 = $.104 for the calculated $.096,
creating an error of $.008, which is only 0.11% of the total.
105
RATH A STRONG
-------
CALCULATION OF THE WEIGHT OF CATALYTIC COMPOUND
USED PER CONVERTER
Volume used is expressed in cubic inches.
Loading is spoken of in grams per cubic foot. For ease of calculation this is
converted to grams per cubic inch.
1 gram/ft3 x 1/1728 = .0005787 gm/in3
Total weight equals volume times loading.
weight (grams) = volume (in ) x loading (gm/ft ) -t- 1728
The matrix following gives grams required for various combination of volume and
loading.
106
RATH & STRONG
inr.otrptn.tio
-------
GRAMS OF COMPOUND REQUIRED FOR VARIOUS VOLUMES AND LOADINGS
LOADING (Gm/Fl3)
?
•4
! I
S a, >-'
5 » O
° it)
m w.
5 H
s a
0
z
0
1
10
20
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1
.00058
.00579
.0115?
.02894
.05787
.08681
.11574
.14468
.17361
.20255
.23148
5
.00289
.029
.058
.145
.289
.434
.579
.723
.B68
1.01
1.16
10
.00579
.058
.116
.289
.579
.868
1.16
1.45
1.74
2.03
2.32
15
.00868
.087
.174
.434
.868
1.30
1.74
2.17
2.60
3.04
3.47
20
.01157
.116
.231
.579
1.16
1.74
2.32
2.89
3.47
4.05
4.63
30
.01736
.174
.347
.868
1.74
2.60
3.47
4.34
5.21
6.08
6.94
40
.02315
.231
.463
1.16
2.31
3.47
4.63
5.79
6.94
8.10
9.26
50
.02894
.289
.579
1.45
2.89
4.34
5.79
7.23
8.68
10.13
11.57
60
.03472
.347
.694
1.74
3.47
5.21
6.94
8. 68
10.42
12.15
13.89
70
.04051
.405
.810
7.03
4.05
6.08
8.10
10.13
12.15
14. IB
16.20
Grams required = Loading (gm/ft") x Volume (in ) -:- 1728
-------
CALCULATION OF THE COST OF CATALYTIC COMPOUND
PER CONVERTER
Cost per converter equals grams required times the cost per gram of the
compound.
For purposes of ready reference, a table is presented giving substrate compound
costs at selected values of platinum-rhodium ratio, grams required and total
platinum-rhodium content.
In this table the following material prices are used:
Platinum $ 5.369/gm = $167/Troy oz.
Rhodium 14.628/gm = 455/Troy oz.
Rhenium 1.709/gm = 53/Troy oz.
Ruthenium 2.009/gm = 62/Troy oz.
Nickel .005/grn = 2.23/av. Ib.
Intermediate values may be interpolated, or calculated directly.
Equation for calculating cost of substrate material per converter.
__„ ,_ _ . 167Pp + 455Pr + Fl - (Pp *• Pr)~l .67
COST = (Pp + Pr) 31104 L J
when ( Pp + Pr)— .845
where Fp = Percent Platinum ««- 100
Pr = Percent Rhodium <- 100
V = Volume in cubic inches
L = Loading in grams per cubic foot
108
RATM & STRONG
-------
COST OF SUBSTRATE MATERIAL PER CONVERTER
>
i Z
n fr~ i
m S» °
; ' NO
o OJ
5 ™
W "Tl
O "*
0
2
0
Line
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Total
Grams
Substrate
Required
(Note 1)
.029
.058
.116
.174
.289
.579
1.16
1.74
2.31
3.47
4.05
5.21
6.08
6.94
7.23
8.10
9.26
10.13
11.57
12.15
13.89
14.18
16.20
% Platinum + % Rhodium = 100%
(See Note 3 if 100%)
Ratio Platinum to Rhodium and Cost Per Gram (Note 2)
1
2:1
$ 8.455
$ .25
.49
.98
1.47
2.44
4.90
9.81
14.71
19.53
29.34
34.24
44.05
51.41
58.68
61.13
68.49
78.29
85.65
97.82
102.73
117.44
119.89
136.97
5:1
$ 6.912
$ .20
.40
.80
1.20
2.00
4.00
8.02
12.03
15.97
23.98
27.99
36.01
42.02
47.97
49.97
55.99
64.01
70.02
79.97
83.98
96.01
98.01
111.97
7:1
$ 6,526
$ .19
.38
.76
1.14
1.89
3.78
7.57
11.36
15.08
22.65
26.43
34.00
39.68
45.29
47.18
52.86
60.43
66.11
75.51
79.29
90.65
92.54
105.72
1
» 9:1
$ 6.295
$ .18
.37
.73
1.10
1.82
3.64
7.30
10.95
14.54
21.84
25.49
32.80
38.27
43.69
45.51
50.99
58.29
63.77
72.83
76.48
87.44
89.26
101.98
11:1
$ 6.141
$ .18
.36
.71
1.07
1.77
3.56
7.12
10.69
14.19
21.31
24.87
31.99
37.34
42.62
44.40
49,74
56.87
62.21
71.05
74.61
85.30
87.08
99.48
19:1
$ 5,832
$ .17
.34
.68
1.01
1.69
3.38
6.77
10.15
13.47
20.24
23.62
30.38
35.46
40.47
42.17
47.24
54.00
59.08
67.48
70.86
81.01
82.07
94.48
25:1
$ 5.725
$ .17
.33
.66
1.00
1.65
3.31
6.64
9.96
13.22
19.87
23.19
29.83
34.81
39.73
41.39
46.37
53.01
57.99
66.24
69.56
79.52
81.18
92.75
30:1
$ 5.668
$ .16
.33
.66
.99
1.64
3.28
6.57
9,86
13.09
19.67
22.96
29.53
34.46
39.34
40.98
45.91
52.49
57.42
65.58
68.87
78.73
80.57
91.82
-------
Note 1: Determine grams required from the table or formula below it. Locate
nearest line (or interpolate between two lines) and read $ in appropriate
ratio column.
Note 2: Cost per grarn calculated at Platinum $167/Troy oz. = $5.369/gram
and Rhodium $455/Troy oz. - $W.628/gram.
Note 3: When Rhenium, Ruthenium of Nickel are also included in the compound,
multiply the value from the table by the combined percentages of
Platinum and Rhodium; add to this the remaining percentage times $^67
times total grams required.
110
RATH A STRONG
INCOIFOIATIO
-------
NOBLE METAL PRICES
-Price
per Troy Ounce*
Metal Wholesale Retail
Platinum
Indium
Rhodium
Paladium
Ruthenium
$162
300
400
60
60
$172
310
410
65
65
"Troy Ounce = 31.1035 grams
Source: Matthey-Bishop, Inc.
Ill
RATH & STRONG
-------
tEQ
i
*3*1
i_L
m
3
r*Vti
7«-
;
-4i4
ft
_1_L
; ' 1 /
ry=
J-i_L
i . i
+—H
' '
1 1
JJ_
*^!TT
TL'ifOlR1;'
'
-K
i | '
j.iai
IIL I '
S
[il
I 1 i
1 f,
^
1 i
_!_L
/
-44-
14-
tUse
119
-------
MFG. COST CALCULATIONS - NONCATALYTIC COMPONENTS, MONOLITHIC CONVERTERS
Vol. - 63 (Base) Dia. - 4 Lgth. - 7.2
Part
Cvtr. Assy.
Shell
Rings (no.)
In. Cone
Out. Cone
In. Pipe
Flanges
Mesh
Hdwr.
Substrt.
Wash Coat
Mat'l
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
Steel
Ceramic
A1203
Weight
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
.25
.15
.10
1.30
-
AMat'l
Cost
.
1.08
.54
.54
.54
.54
.14
.08
.03
6.32
.81
2Labor
.68
.17
.08
.08
.08
.08
.04
.04
.04
.34
.17
OH
.27
.07
.03
.03
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.14
.07
Mfg.
Cost
.95
1.32
.65
.65
.65
.65
.20
.14
.09
6.80
1.05
TOTALS
10.62
1.80
.73
13.15
113
RATH & STRONG
IXCOIIPOHATIO
-------
Vol. - 10 Dia. - 4 Lgth. - 2.1
Weight
.76
.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
.25
.04
.10
.21
Mat'l
Cost
.41
.27
.54
.54
.54
.14
.03
.03
1.03
.14
Labor
.51
.04
.08
.08
.08
.04
.02
.04
.17
.08
OH
.20
.02
.03
.03
.03
.02
.01
.02
.07
.03
Mfg.
Cost
.71
.33
.65
.65
.65
.20
.06
.09
1.27
.25
3.67 1,25 .50 5.42
114
RATH A STRONG
INCQI»O*A1tD
-------
Vol. - 100
Dia. * 4
Lgth. - 10.6
Cvtr. Assy.
Shell
Rings (no*)
In. Cone
Out. Cone
In. Pipe
Flanges
Mesh
HHu/r.
Substrt .
Wash Coat
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
Steel
Ceramic
AU03
9.46
2.83
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
.25
.22
.10
2.06
-
1.53
.54
.54
.54
.54
.14
.12
.03
10.03
1.23
.77
.21
.08
.08
.08
.08
,04
.05
.04
.46
.23
.31
.08
.03
.03
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.18
.09
1.08
1.82
.65
.65
.65
.65
.20
.19
.09
10.67
1.60
TOTALS
15.29
2.12
.84
18.25
115
RATH A STRONG
-------
Vol. - 150 Dia. - 4 Lgth. - 15.4
12.27
4.00
1.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
.25
.32
.10
3.10
-
2.16
.81
.54
.54
.54
.14
.18
.03
15.08
1.95
.93
.27
.13
,08
.08
.08
.04
.07
.04
.62
.31
.37
,11
.05
.03
.03
.03
.02
.03
.02
.25
.12
1.30
.54
.99
.65
.65
.65
.20
.28
.09
15.95
2.38
21.97 2.65 1.06 25.68
116
RATH A STRONO
INCOBfOIATCD
-------
MFG. COST CALCULATIONS - NONCATALYTIC COMPONENTS
Vol. - 200
Dia. - 5.4
Lgth. - 12.5
Part
Cvtr. Assy.
Shell
Rings (no.)
In. Cone
Out. Cone
In. Pipe
Flanges
Mesh
Hdwr.
Substrt.
Wash Coat
Mat'l
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
Stesl
Ceramic
A1203
Weight
15.60
4.56
2.03
1.35
1.35
1.35
.34
.35
.14
4.13
Mat'l
Cost
-
2.46
1.09
.73
.73
.73
.19
.19
.04
20.09
2.57
Labor
1.11
.30
.15
.10
.10
.10
.05
.08
.05
.78
.39
OH
.44
.12
.06
.04
.04
.04
.02
.03
.02
.31
.16
Mfg.
Cost
1.55
2.88
1.36
.87
.87
.87
.26
.30
.11
21.18
3.12
TOTALS
28.82
3.21
1.28
33.31
117
RATH & STRONG
INCOIPOIATIB
-------
Vol. - 300
Die. - 5.4
Lgth. - 18.3
Cvtr. Assy.
Shell
Rings (no.)
In. Cone
Out. Cone
In. Pipe
Flanges
Mesh
Hdwr.
Substrt.
Wash Coat
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
409 SS
029 SS
409 SS
409 SS
Steel
Ceramic
A1203
20.40
6.47
2.70
1.35
1.35
1.35
.34
.51
.14
6.19
-
3.50
1.46
.73
.73
.73
.19
.27
.04
30.11
3.86
1.39
.40
.20
.10
.10
.10
.05
.10
.05
1.10
.55
.56
.16
.08
.04
.04
.04
.02
.04
.02
.44
.22
1.95
4.06
1.74
.87
.87
.87
.26
.41
.11
31.65
4.63
TOTALS
41.62
4.14
1.66
47.42
118
RATM A STRONG
INCOtPORATtO
-------
Vol. - 250 Dia. - 5.4 Lgth. - 15.4
Weight
17.67
5.52
2.03
1.35
1.35
1.35
.34
.43
.14
5.16
Mat'l
Cost
_
2.99
1.09
.73
.73
.73
.19
.23
.04
24.84
3.22
Labor
1.22
.35
.15
.10
.10
.10
.05
.09
.05
.94
.47
OH
.49
.14
.06
.04
.04
.04
.02
.04
.02
.38
.19
Mfg.
Cost
1.71
3.48
1.30
.87
.87
.87
.26
.36
.11
26.16
3.88
34.79 3.62 1.46 39.87
119
RATH A STRONG
INCO»PO«ATID
-------
Vol. - 400 Dia. - 5.4 Lgth. - 23.9
25.14
8.3i
3.38
1.35
1.35
1.35
.34
.67
.14
8.25
-
4.49
1.82
.73
.73
.73
.19
.36
.04
40.14
5.14
1.67
.49
.26
.10
.10
.10
.05
.13
.05
1.42
.71
.67
.20
.10
.04
.04
.04
.02
.05
.02
.57
.28
2.34
5.18
2.18
.87
.87
.87
.26
.54
.11
42.13
6.13
54.37 5.08 2.03 61.48
Equations Mfg. Cost = $4.05 * $.144 (Vol.)
120
RATH & STRONG
-------
DETERMINATION OF SUBSTRATE AND SHELL DIMENSIONS
FOR MONOLITHIC CONVERTERS
Imposed Space Limits to Shell
Diameter Shell - 6.0"
Length Shell - 24.0"
Implied space limits to substrate contained in shell.
Diameter - 6.0 - 0.5 (metal mesh) = 5.5"
Length - 24.0 - 1.1 (endcap) = 22.9"
Two shell diameters were selected to accomodate the range of substrate volumes:
(refer to graph)
Vpj (in) Dia (in) Length (in)
0-150 4.0 0-15.1
151-400 5.4 f.7-24.0
Length of shell required at given substrate volume.
Substrate Dia. Shell Length Shell
Volume (in) (incl. mesh) (inel. cap)
1 4.0 .10+1.1= 1.2
10 4.0 .95+1.1= 2.1
20 4.0 1.90+1.1= 3.0
50 4.0 4.75+1.1= 5.9
100 4.0 9.50+1.1=10.6
150 4.0 14.2£+1.1=15.4
151 5.4 8.63+1.1= 9.7
200 5.4 11.^3-1-1.1=12.5
250 5.4 14.29-1-1.1=15.4
300 5.4 17.15+1.1=18.3
350 5.4 20.00+1.1=21.1
121
RATH A STRONG
INCORPORATED
-------
i I
I 5
3 3
0
z
0
22 -
20 -
18
J l2 •
LU
10 J
8 J
to
2 .
0
LENGTH OF SUBSTRATE REQUIRED TO ATTAIN VOLUME
AT THREE SPECIFIC DIAMETERS
LIMITS? LENGTH 2V MAX. OVERALL SHELL} LESS I.I = 22.9" MAX. LENGTH
OF SUBSTRATE
VOLUME WO IN3 MAX.
" SHELL * 3.66" DIA. SUBSTRATE
4.72" DIA. =5.4" SHELL
5.49" DIA. = 6" SHELL
LENGTH = (VOL.)
DIA?tT
1 I
SIS
0 20 40 £0 80 100
200
VOLUME (CU. IN.)
300
22.9
400
-------
DETERMINATION OF RING DIAMETER
Volume
Substrate Dia. Ring
In. In.
0-150 4.0
151-400 5.4
123
RATH A STRONG
INCORPORATED
-------
ID - AIR-FUEL METERING SYSTEMS
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
The detailed descriptions and calculations following thii page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978. Th-s
costs ihown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing valume (economy of
•cale) between automobilas and trucks. The EOS user for automobiles Is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costi for trucks are shown below.
1, Elec tronjc FueI Inj.ection
Interpolation for an EOS of 50,000 from Table 1» using the .914 decrement
factor:
Truck OEM Cost = $162.62
Adding Mark-ups (x2.2)
Truck Retail Pries Equivalent $357.76
124
RATH ft STRONQ
L
-------
System: Fuel metering - Gasoline
K-Jetronic components
The cone in which the sensor
plate rises can be shaped for
individual specifications of air-
fuel ratios for various load levels,
Plate position is transmitted di-
rectly by lever to the fuel-distribu-
tor control plunger.
Reproduced from
best available copy.
Plunger movement is countered
by a hydraulic fuel force which
can be modulated by the warm-up
regulator for mixture enriching.
Full-load enrichment is also
possible.
125
-------
System: Fuel metering - Gasoline
K-Jetronic from Bosch:
Continuous Injection System (CIS)
Et«ctric fiMl pump
Schematic of K-Jetronic
In the K-Jetronic, the air-flow
through the induction system is
measured directly without elec-
tronics or mechanical drive.
In the mixture control unit, the
air-flow sensor plate is deflected
against the hydraulic force of
regulated fuel pressure. The fuel
is continuously metered by con-
trol slits and downstream dif-
ferential-pressure valves.
At each cylinder, fuel is in-
jected continuously at the proper
rate through an injector at the
intake port.
126
-------
Electronic Fuel Metering System
(Bosch, iendlx, and Chrysler System)
The EFI-L {EleetronicaI iy"Controlled Fuel Injection System,
Air-Flow Sensitive), Is an Intermittently operating system,
with, low-pressure Injection of fuel into the intake manifold.
In this system, the quantity of air drawn in by the engine is
measured directly, and Is used as the main control parameter
for the quantity of fuel required. The fuel Is metered by
solenoid-operated Injection valves. These valves are under
constant
-------
Fuel Intake manifold with provision for mounting the fuel rail.
Fuel nozzles--* precision solenoid operated by the electronic
con trol unIt.
Throttle body--the basic air control unit that Includes a
throttle sensor and a cold-start air control.
Speed sensor unlt--the magnet assembly equipped with a reed
switch assembly for sensing the engine R.P.N,
Electronic control unit and subsystern--thIs system provides
the control signals and the feedback response from water and
air sensors pressure sensors, and a fuel pressure regulator.
When combined with most three-way catalyst systems, the ECU
Includes the capability of receiving feedback from an oxygen
sensor and adjusts the air-fuel ratio accordingly.
Qxygen-sensor--the platinum-coated ceramic sensor located in
the exhaust stream. This Is normally Included only with three-
way catalyst systems.
The EFI system coupled with a 3~way catalyst system is currently
being installed in some European vehicles sold In the U.S.A.
most of which are sold !n the State of California.
128
RATH * STRONG
INCGHPOBATCe
-------
Currently, these Lilts are manufactured and bought In
relatively small annual quantities; and, consequently, unit
costs are higher than they would be If quantities were
increased by several magnitudes. In order to arrive at a
logical and consistent method, for realistically estimating
future costs at higher purchase quantities, a learning curve
methodology has been employed.
Estimates of prices on 5,000; 200,000; and 500,000 lot
sizes were solicited from U.S.A. and European sources.
(These are shown in the first three columns of Table 1.)
Analysis of these figures indicates a learning curve of
91.^1, with Individual items deviating, but not: significantly,
in the overall. (A 91.41 curve means an 8.6% decrease in
unit cost for each doubling of the quantity.)
The last two columns in Table 1 are mathematical extrapolations
of the 500,000 price by .914 and »Jk2 respectively to estimate
prices for 1,000,000 and 5,000,000 units.
129
RATH 4 STRONG
INEOI1>O(6TCO
-------
1976/77 200,000
1978/79 500,000
The plan for production of electronic fuel injection systems
at various volumes was proposed as:
Year Volume Production P1 an
1975 5,000 Purchase all the components from
known U.S.A. and European sources.
Start manufacturing nozzles, throttle
devices, fuel pumps, and ECU units.
Purchase mass production loading.
Redesign the ECU using Integrated
circuits and combine some of the e
external serve functions into the ECU.
Provide for mass production facilities
of the major components. Include the
major valves as manufactured items.
Develop a new cost reduction design
and include the balance of the I terns
In the manufacturing program. Tool
up the final mass production facilities
for all components.
The total investment for such a facility to produce 5,000,000
units per year would be $55,000,000, which includes launching
costs and equipme.it costs. Over $11,300,000 would be expended
for tooling the nozzles.
1979/80 1,000,000/
5,000,000
130
RATH A STRONG
INCO**ai*TIQ
-------
Table 1 - OEM COSTS—8-CYLINDER SYSTEM
Industry Estimates Projected Estimates
Quantity
Injectors
0_ Sensor -
ECU
Air Temperature
H_O Temperature
Throttle Switch
Fuel Pump Assembly
Fuel Pressure Regulator
Fast Idle Valve
Throttle Body
Air Solenoid Valve
Fuel Filter
Fuel Rail
Speed Sensor
Intake Manifold
Wiring Harness
5 K
$ 56.00
6.00
75,00
1.75
1.75
3.00
15.00
3.00
5.00
10.00
4.00
3.50
8.50
1.50
25.20
$21§.20
200 K
$ 40.00
4.50
15.00
1.75
1.75
3.00
15.00
2.90
3.51
8.78
3.25
2.00
6.00
1.00
10.00
$148.44
50C K
$ 32.00
2.36
45.00
1.25
3.25
2.30
12.00
2.57
2.00
5.00
2.00
1.00
5.00
.75
5.00
$119.48
1.000 K
$ 29.25
2.16
41.13
1.14
1.14
2.10
10.97
2.35
1.83
4.57
1.83
.91
4.57
.69
4.57
$109.21
5,000 K
$ 23.74
1.7S
33. 3S
.93
.93
1.71
8.90
1.91
1.48
3.71
1.50
.74
3.71
.56
3.71
$ 88.67
^Normally used with three-way catalyst systems only.
131
RATH A STRONG
IMCOaPdMTtB
-------
The sticker prlc* contribution for feedback controlled
EFI systems Installed In various size vehicles and engines
at a production volume of 5.000,000 units would be:
Vehicle
S ubsompact
Compact
Standard
Cyl.
k -
6 -
8 -
Cl D
\ko
250
350
Mfg. Cost
$76.80
82.97
88.67
Markup
1.8
2.0
2.2
Sticker P rice
$138.00
166.00
195.00
When making comparisons to feedback controlled carbureted
systems for these same engines, the control valves, sensors,
and feedback controls must be Included. Also, a more
sophisticated carburetor, valued at $18 to $24 manufacturing
costs, has to be considered. The author has created the delta
costs to achieve several levels of emissions. When making
comparisons of feedback controlled EFI and carbureted systems,
to achieve the same levels of emissions, the cost deltas are
not significantly different at the vehicle sticker price level,
132
RATH A STRONG
-------
eicanoNic
CONTROt UNIT
WATER
TCMPEBATURE
SENSOR
>' ~ ~*f ^
AIR.
TEMPERATURE
SCN30R
FUEL INJECTOR
(4 REQ'D)
I ' *^) ^
I'U1 iW»*O
BSUED AS OF
•H 4 Etoetronto
Fuel Injection
Division
-------
Erra • ^P^Tv/y/*^"raP'Crai EL /I F318 I Hk B/51^ "TP* I J^^F^ I<1^
FB SYSTEM FUNG i IONS
TRIGGER
UNIT
M.A.P
SENSOR
START
SOLENOID
IGNITION
SWITCH
COOLANT
TEMP
SENSOR
ELECTRONIC
CONTROL
UNIT
COOLkNT
TEMP
SENSOR
(MECHANICAL)
DECEL
CUT OFF
SWITCH
I
FUEL
PUMP
THROTTLE
TRANSIENT
SENSOR
MR INLET
TEMP
SENSOR
THROTTLE BODY
FAST
IDLE MR
VALVE •
COMBUSTION
CONTROL
VALVE
INJECTORS
GROUP I
INJECTORS
GROUP 2
-------
Electronic Control Unit
The Electronic Control Unit Is the heart of the EF1 system.
Its function Is to deliver fuel to the engine at a rat« which
is * function of continuously measured engine Input and output
parameters. The current production model ECU also provides
fuel pump power control, engine start auzillary air control,,
and exhaust gas reelrcula11 on (EGR) on/off control.
The circuit design architecture of the Electronic Control
Unit, relies on several production technologies. Four custom
bipolar Integrated circuits implement the core control law
function, that Is common to all ECU calibrations. These circuits
are contained on a ceramic thick-film substrate module. Unique
circuit functions are Implemented using standard bipolar
integrated circuits and discrete components. Thick-film laser
trimmed passive resistor networks are incorporated to realize
base calibration, and each individual production unit is final
trimmed to meet performance specifications. Addition*] components
include the Intake manifold pressure sensor, two power relays,
and a custom hard mounted connector. All components are mounted
on two printed circuit boards, which are conformal coated for
environmental protection.
The Electronic Control Unit Is Installed in the passenger
compartment behind the dash panel. It is designed to function
at a maximum temperature of 185°F (85°C). In the current
production model, no attempt was made to maximize compactness;
rather, functional and calibration flexibility were deliberately
designed Into the unit to accommodate anticipated changes and
Improvements which were Indeed made during the development stage*
135
RATH A STRONG
-------
Sensors
Intake manifold absolute pressure is measured with in accuracy of ^ 1 percent,
using an aneroid, linear variable differential transformer sensor device. This
censor is mounted on the ECU printed circuit board to implement concurrent
calibration of sensor and ECU and to increase reliability by minimizing the
number of electrical connections between ths sensor and the computing circuits,
inglne speed is sensed using two magnetic reed switches mounted on the
ignition distributor casting, adjacent to the drive shaft. Installed on the
drive shaft is a magnet assembly. This senior provides engine phasing as
well as engine speed dista.
Engine water temperature and intake manifold air temperature are sensed
using a high temperature coefficient precision resistor, formed from nickel
wire wound on a bobbin, which is epoxy encased. .The sensor output is
precise and linear over the temperature range encountered.
Data on throttle position and rate of change of throttle motion are provided by
a routing shaft sensor. Mechanical contacts on the shaft slide over a printed
circuit board on which electric current carrying tracks are mounted. Rotational
information is realised when tracks are crossed as the throttle moves. The
, discrete voltage levels isnied are processed in the ECU to yield the required
data.
injectors
The fuel valving, metering, and atomizing functions are performed by the
injectors, which are located, one for each cylinder, in the vicinity of
the intake valves. These injectors are essentially solenoid actuated on/off
136
RATH A STRONS
-------
poppet valves incorporating pintles designed for metering and atomization.
Since a constant fuel pressure dlffe. sntial if maintained across the injector,
the rate of fuel delivery Is proportional to the injector open time, which
varies from 2.5 to 10 milliseconds.
Air Flow Calculating Versus Air Flow Sensing EFi Systems
The first generation of Bosch EFI systems were called the D-Jetronic, where
D stands for Oruck, which means pressure in German. This name Is derived
from the fact that one of the main inputs to this sytem is intake manifold
pressure. In this system the fuel loop consists of the fuel pump, the fuel
filter, and the fuel pressure regulator. With constant fuel pressure applied
to the Injectors, the amount o/ fuel injected on a per stroke basis Is proportional
to the timing of the regulator which can be controlled. Air flow can be
calculated using displacement, engine speed and manifold density, and the
desired air/fuel ratio can be obtained by changing the injector on time.
The next generation of Sosch EFI system was the L-Jetronlc system, where
L stands for Luftmengenmessung, which means air flow measurement in German.
In this system the fuel loop is basically the same as in the D-Jetronlc system
except that the fuel pressure regulator is connected by a hose to the intake
manifold so that the fuel pressure Is a function of the manifold pressure and
the pressure loop across the injectors is thus kept constant.
Also, In this system, tne air flew rate*Is measured by an air
flow meter whose moveable measuring plate Is opened by the air
stream against the force of a spring. The positron of the
measuring plate Is sensed by a potentiometer. Its voltage Is
proportional to the volume of ai-r flow and is one of the main
input signals Into the electronic control unit. The second
input Is en;,ne speed taken from the distributor.
137
•I
RATH A STRONG
IMCOIPnlATIt?
-------
Measurement of air flew Is said by Bosch to exhibit th* following advantages.
1. Compensation of tolerances which are due to wear, deposits in the
combustion chamber, or changes In the valve adjustments.
2, Compensation of engine speed-dependent volumetric efficiency.
3. No necessity of acceleration enrichment because the air flow signal
precedes the filling of the cylinders,
4. improved idling stability,
S. Insensitivity to changes in the exhaust back pressure caused by thermal
or catalytic reactors.
6. InsensitivJty of the system to iGR because only the fresh air portion
is measured.
Closed Loop/Electronic Fuel Injection Systems
The term closed loop requires some discussion. One use of the term closed
loop is to describe adaptive systems where feedback of output directly Influences
the input. This is so called extremum seeking adaptive control. Another use
of the term closed loop is to describe systems where the output is used for error
correction to some programmed parameter. Current closed leap fu«S
management systems are of this latter type. '
138
RATH a STRONG
-------
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
3. Standard Carburetor
The detailed description* and calculations following this page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 79 - 002, March, 1978. The
costs shown therein have been adjusted by using fsctorn, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles ia 350,000
par year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Automobile
Unit Cost
Material
Labor and Overhead
Equipment
Tooling
3.78
b.75
1.58
.40
Weighted EOS Factor
1.3
2.7
2.4
3.4
2.3
Carb-1
Carb-2
Carb-3
x Automobile RPE $22.60
Truck RPE
$51.98
$26.62
$61.23
$35.15
$80.85
139
RATH * STRONG
-------
Standard Carburetor
The itandard carburetor is a complex system of components that provides
appropriate mixtures of air and fuel to the intake manifold throughout the various
driving cycles of the vehicle.
One of these carburetors is the Holley Model 1945. This carburetor is a single
venturi concentric downdraft carburetor equipped on 225 CID 6-cy1!nder
engines. It consists of ths following subsystems:
1. Fuel inlet system
2. Idle system
3. Main Metering system
4. Power enrichment system
5. Accelerating pump system
6. Automatic Choke Vacuum Kick system
The dual barrel carburetors such as Carters BBO and the Holley 2245 include an
added subsystem called the idle enrichment system. This carburetor is used on 318-
V8 CID engines.
The Carter TO carburetor is e 4-barrel carburetor designed for 360, 400, and 440
CIO V6 engines. The subsystems include both low and high speed performance
circuits. This carburetor is also designed to incorporate an altitude compensation
system. This system will be treated separately In another section of this
report.
140
RATH * STRONG
-------
The basic data for 1975 vehicles are:
Carburetor Part No.
List Price S
Weight Ibs.
Vehicle
3830576
3830565
3830563
Choke Part No.
3830549
3830512
3751476
$112.00
79.35
87.24
List Price $
$ 10.22
7.25
12.55
5.550
4.510
6.710
Weight Ibs.
,250
.190
.250
Valiant 225
Satellite 318
Fury 360
Vehicle
Valiant
Satellite
Fury (et al)
Source: Chrysler Data
The costs will be gross estimates since a complete analysis involves estimating
between 100 to 230 components.
These carburetors provide an interface subsystem for EGR systems.
141
RATH A STRONG
IMCQUPRBATIII
-------
Standard Carburetor
Manufacturing Costs
Bill of Material
Z
»
Z
0
Carburetor 1
Primary Parts
Secondary Parts
Total
Carburetor Z
Primary Parts
Secondary Parts
Total
Carburetor 4
Primary Parts
Intermediate Pts
Secondary Parts
Total
Material
Alum.
Alum.
Alum.
Phenolic
Steel
Weight
4.510
4.014
.496
5.500
4.895
.605
6.710
5.472
.500
.738
Material
Costa
2.4084
.0992
2.5076
2.9370
.1210
3.0580
3.2822
.3500
.1476
Labor
Costs
3.5000
.4000
3.9000
4.2000
.5000
4.7000
5.2500
.3000
.7000
Labor
Overhead
1.4000
.1600
1.5600
1.6800
.2000
1.8800
2.1000
.1200
.2800
Manufacturing
Costs Reference
7.3084
.6592
7.9676
8.8170
.8210
9.6380
10.6322
.7700
1.1276
3.7798
6.2500 2.5000
12.5298
Choices
Steel
.250
.050
.3500
,1400
.5400
-------
Standard Carburetor
Tooling Costs
Amortization Per Piece
Part
12 Year
J Year 3 Year Machinery
Economic Recurring Nonrecurring and
Volume Tooling Tooling Equipment
12 Year 40 Year Amortization
Launching Land and per
Costa Building Piece
i I
.1000 .2000
Carburetor 1 1,000,000 100,000 600,000
.1000 .1333
Carburetor 2 2,000,000 200,000 800,000
1.0000 .1000
12,000,000 1,200,000
1.0000 .0625
24,000,000 1,500,000
1.4000
1.2955
Carburetor 4
.1500 .2500
2,000,000 300,000 1,500,000
1.5000 e0833
36,000,000 2,000,000
1.9833
-------
Standard Carburetor
Total Manufacturing Coats
Plant Tooling
Material Labor Plant Mfg.
Costa Costa Overhead Costa Exp. Inv.
Corp. Corp. Mfg.
Alloc, Profit Vendor
.20 MC .20MC Coslt
I I
n
2 »
5 (fl
Ij
0
Carburetor 1 2.5076 3.9000 1.5600 7.9676 .3000 1.100 1.5935 1.5935 12.5546
Carburetor 2 3.0580 4.7000 1.B800 9.6380 .2333 1.0625 1.9276 1.9276 14.7890
Carburetor 4 3.7798 6.2500 2.5000 12.5298 .4000 1.5833 2.5060 2.5060 19.5250
-------
i
i j '! -
»h\
£
I
145
-------
Standard Carburetor
Retail Price Equivalent at the Vehicle Level
Tools
Vendor and AUoc. Profit Markup Price
Part Costa RAD Equip. .20VC* .20VC* .40VC* Equivalent
Carb 1 12.5546 - - 2.5109 2.51095.0218 22.5983
Carb 2 3*1.7890 - - 2.9578 2.9578 5.9»56 26.6202
Carb 4 19.5250 - - 3.9050 3.9050 7.8100 35.1*150
146
RATH A STRONG
IMEaiPDVATEO
-------
. " Standard Carburetor
Cost Comparison to AftermarUet Selling Prices
Using the after market price* and the discount data we can make the following
comparison to the me 'factoring cost estimates.
Estimates
List Price
Carb 1 79.35
Carb 2 87.24
Carb 4 112.GO
Standard Carburetor
i Discount
1A 1/5
19.84 15.37
21.81 17.65
28.00 22.40
Vendor Cost
RPE
12.55 22.60
14.79 26.62
19.52 35. H
Cost Methodology
The weight and selling price data were obtained from Chrysler engineering
data and sales catalogs.
The costs are estimates based on judgment. The estimates are not supported by
detail costs of each component. Therefore, these estimates are gross estimates
using weight data and material type selections.
Standard Carburetor
Applications
As stated previously, the 1, 2, & 4 barrel carburetors are usually associated with
225 CID, 318 CID, 360 CID and over engines. In recent years, domr k barrel
applications have been replaced by 2 barrel carburetors.
The altitude compensation and electronic feedback subsystems have been treated
separately.
147
RATH a STRONG
-------
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
3a Carburetor Modification For Altitude
Tho detailed descriptions and calculations following thig page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978, The
costs shown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later In this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles end trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Material
Labor and Overhead
Equipment
Automobile
Unit Cost
.272
1.629
,080
Tooling .182
Weighted EOS Factor
x Automobile Retail
= Truck Retail Price
Price Equivalent
Equivalent
EOS
Factor
1.3
2.7
2.4
3.4
2.6
$5.58
$14.51
148
RATH A STRONG
IMCOMPOBATCG
-------
Carburetor Modifications for Altitude Compensation
In order to maintain the appropriate fuel/air mixture while under the influence of a
thin atmosphere, a main system altitude compensation circuit has been incorpo-
rated into the design of the Thermo-Quad carburetor for most California models.
The modification affects the primary metering systems as follows:
A small cylindrical bellows chamber mounted on the front of carburetor, is vented
directly to atmosphere. Atmospheric pressure changes expands or contracts the
bellows. A small brass tapered-seat valve regulates air flow when it is raised off
its seat by the expanding bellows. A small spring is positioned on top of the
tapered valve between the valve and housing. The function of the spring is to help
maintain the valve in the closed position when the system is exposed to a marginal
pressure head (one which is neither sufficient to hold tht valve at the proper
altitude), and to mechanical vibrations which would tend to unseat the valve during
the above condition. When the appropriate environment is encountered and extra
air is required, (as determined by the bellows) it is supplied to the primary main air
bleeds through a calibrated orifice that meters the proper amount of air to the air
bleed.
The system operates as follows; Some time during engine operation a thin
atmosphere is encountered, producing an increasingly rich fuel/air mixture. At a
mechanically pre-determined point the bellows begin to expand allowing additional
air to enter the main air bleeds. The auxiliary air, coupled with the present air
source, provides the system witn the proper amount of air necessary to maintain
the correct fuel/air mixture. The system supplies varying amounts of additional air
depending upon different altitudes. When sufficient atmospheric pressure is again
restored, the valve closes and the system returns to its normal mode cf operation.
149
RATH A STRONG
IMEOIPOIATEO
-------
CARBURETOR MODIFICATIONS FOR ALTITUDE COMPENSATION
IDU &WCMMSKT INLET AIK
VALVE ASSSMilY y (ATMOSPHERIC PttSSURB
ALTrtUOf
COMPEN5ATO1
ASSEMBLY
M1MAIY MCTERINC
OfttfiCE
Com|Mn*ater System
150
RATH A STRONG
-------
Carburetor Modifications for Altitude Compensation
Manufacturing Costs Bifl of Material
5
I
5
! S
2
0
Part
Altitude Comp.
Asm.
Carburetor Mod
Aneroid
Valve
Cup
Valve Hsg.
Hardware
Total
Material
Copper
Steel
Steel
Alum
Weight
.400
.100
.120
.050
.050
.150
.030
Material
Costs
*»
.0600
.0960
.0100
.0100
.0900
.0060
Labor
Costs
.1250
.2500
.2500
.1250
.0625
.3500
.0010
Labor i
Overhead
.0500
.1000
.1000
.0500
.0250
.1400
.0004
Manufacturi
Costs
.1750
.4100
.4460
.1850
.0975
.5800
.0074
Reference
Chrysler
J.900S
-------
Carburetor Modifications for Altitude Compensation
Tooling Coats Amortization Per Piece
12 Year
3
H
; I
0 !_,
s > S
"» Is3
D 0
i 3
o
2
Part
Alt. Camp. Asm.
Carburetor Mod
Aneroid
Valve
Cup
Valve Hsg.
Hardware
Total
Economic
Volume
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,01)0,000
1,OUQ,000
10,000,000
1 Year
Recurring
Toolinq
.0100
10, GOO
.0200
20,000
.0300
30,000
.0100
10,000
.0100
10,000
.0300
30,000
.0010
10,000
3 Year
Machinery
Nonrecurring and
Toolinq
.0100
30,000
.0200
60,000
.0300
90,000
.0100
30,000
.0100
30,000
.0300
90,000
.0010
30,000
Equipment
.0020
24,000
.0200
240,000
.0100
120,000
.0100
120,000
.0100
120,000
.0200
240,000
.0010
120,000
12 Year 40 Year
Launching Land and
Costs fiuildinq
.0002
24,000
.0020
24,000
.0010
12,000
.0010
12,000
.0010
12,000
.0020
2ft ,000
.0001
12,000
Amortization
Per Piece
,0222
.0620
.0710
,0310
.0310
.0820
.0031
.'3023
Research & Development - $2^0,00 per year for 3 years for 1,000,000 units per year ~ .25 per carburetor.
-------
Carburetor Modifications for Altitude Compensation
Total Manufacturing Costa
3)
>
H
; I
3 U
0
2
ID
Port
Alt. Comp. Asm.
Carburetor Mod
Aneroid
Vaivc
Cup
Valve Hag.
Hardware
T.ital
Material
-
.0600
.0960
.0100
.0100
.0900
.0060
Labor
.1250
.2500
.2500
.1250
.0625
.3500
.0010
Plant
Overhead
.0500
.1000
.1000
.0500
.0250
.1400
.0004
Mftj.
Costs
.1750
.4100
.4460
.1850
.0975
.5Bfin
.0074
Tot
Exjn
.0200
.0400
.0600
.0200
.0200
.0600
.0020
Dling
Inv.
.0022
.0220
.0110
.0110
.0110
.0220
.0011
Corp.
Alloc.
. 20MC*
.0350
.0820
.0892
.0370
.0195
.1160
.0015
Corp.
Profit
.20MC*
.0750
.082C
.0892
.0370
.0195
.1160
.0015
Vendor
Mfg.
Ccstn
.2672
.6360
.6954
.2900
.1675
.B3kQ
,0135
. 272
1.6289
.102
.01103
2.9636
-------
... Carburetor Modification for Altitude Compensation
Retail Price Equivalent at the Vehicle Level
Vehicle
Plant Tools Corp. Corp. Dealer Retail
Vendor and Alloc. Profit Markup Price
Part Costa R&D Equip. .20VC* .20VC* .40VC* Equivalent
All. Comp.Asm. 2.9636 .2500 - .5927 .592? KISS* 5.58M
154
RATH A 3TRONQ
IMGOIPOM1IB
-------
Carburetor Modification for Altitude Compenstion Cost Comparison
to After-market Selling Prices
The only data obtainable for the delta increase in carburetor aftermarket selling
prices is to compare the California 1977 system with the 49 state carburetor
system.
The 2 barrel carburetor prices show a delta of about $20 or about $5.00 if the 1/4
discount is used. The manufacturing/vendor estimate is $2.9636 and the RPE is
$5, 58^4. Since we do not know what the delta price includes this comparison is not
conclusive.
Carburetor Modification for Altitude Compensation Cost Methodology
Using the Chrysler sketch the unit weight of the components was estimated. The
materials are also estimated. The costs are based on an ecomony of scale of
1,000,000 units per year.
Carburetor Modification far Altitude Compensation Applications
It can be assumed that the altitude compensation system will be similar for 1, 2,
and 4 barrel carburetors. The costs per system might be slightly less but not
significant for this study.
155
RATH A STRONG
INCOMOIATCa
-------
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
3b Carburetor Modification for Feedback Control
The detailed descriptions and circulations following this page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978. The
costs shown therein have been adjusted by usino factor*, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in aize and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting ref ail price equivalent costs for trucks ore shown below.
Automobile
Unit Cost
Material .87 1.3
Labor and Overhead 2.00 2.7
Equipment .10 2.4
Tooling .26 3.4
Weighted EOS Factor 2.4
X Automobile Retail Price Equivalent $8.17
= Truck Retail Price Equivalent $19.61
156
RATH A STRONG
-------
Carburetor Modifications for Feedback Control
The pictorial schematic in Figure Z shows the system elements of the basic system.
The CL sensor, located in the exhaust stream between the engine and the catalyst,
produces a voltage of about 800 millivolts in the absence of oxygen in the exhaust.
This voltage decreases to zero as the oxygen in the exhaust stream increases from 0
to
The voltage signal from the sensor is the prime control input to the electronic control
unit which provides a square wave output signal of constant frequency, but of variable
band width depending on the CL sensor voltage. The ECU is designed so that at low
values of oxygen in the exhaust (highest level of sensor voltage output), the output
signal band width is the greatest. Conversely, as the oxygen concentration increases
in the exhaust and the sensor voltage decreases, the band width decreases.
This variable width output signal operates the vacuum control valve, which serves to
modulate the vacuum that is applied to the carburetor from the vacuum storage
canister. Because the "on time" of the valve is a function of (L sensor signal, the
modulated vacuum resulting from variable "on time" is also a function of D-.
The sensor shows the two systems in the carburetor that are controlled by the
modulated vacuum. The idle system is controlled by providing a variable air bleed
parallel with the normal air bleed to control idle metering forces.
Control of the main system is accomplished by varying the fuel orifice in parallel
with the main metering jet. This construction is a refinement of today's power
enrichment system.
In operation, when a high vacuum is applied to the carburetor, it will tend to meter
lean. This is accomplished when the solenoid has a high percentage of "on" time.
Conversely, when the solenoid is off or operating at a low "on" time level, the control
vacuum is low and the carburetor metering will enrichen.
157
RATH A STRONG
-------
FIGURE 2
HOLLEY FEEDBACK CARBURETOR ENGINE SYSTEM
i I
n
5 »
*
1 5
Z
0
VACUUM CONTROL VALVE
VACUUM STORAGE CANISTER.
SENSOR TEMP
INDICATOR
PATENT PENDING 1976 HOLLEY CARBURETOR DIVISION
-------
Carburetor Modifications for Feedback Control Unit
TOOLING COSTS
Amortization per Piece
z
n
a
n
a
m
n
a
S
H
I
» C
v£
(A
-1
7
0
z
c
Part
Mod Carb Aaay
Mod Carb
; Fix Idle Bleed
Idle FB Valve
FB Main Valve
Contl Vac Conn
Economic
Volume
Per Year
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1-Year
Recurring
Tooling
.0500
50,000
.0500
50,000
.0050
5000
.0100
10,000
.0100
10,000
.0050
5000
3-Year Non
Recurring
Tooling
.0500
150,000
.0500
150,000
.0050
15,000
.0100
30,000
.0100
30,uno
.0050
15,000
1 2- Year
Machinery
Equipment
.0200
240,000
.0500
600,000
.0010
12,000
.0100
120,000
.0100
120,000
.0010
12,000
12-Year
Launchirig
Costs
.0020
24,000
.0050
60,000
,0001
1200
.0010
12,000
.00)0
12,000
.0001
12,000
40-Year Amortization
Land & Per
Buildings Piece
.1220
.1550
.0111
.0310
.0310
--
Total
. 1300
. 1300
.0920
.0092
.3612
HAD - 300,000/year for 3 years for 1,000,000 uniis/jjur = $.30/unit
-------
Carburetor Modifications for Feedback Control Unit
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
Plant
Over-
Part Mat Labor Head
Plant
Mfg
Costs Tooling
(MC) Exp, Inv.
.20/MC
Corp.
Costs
.20/MC
Corp.
Profit
Mfg/
Vend
Cost:
F.B. Carburetor .8700 1.4250 .5700 2.8650 .2600 .1012 .5730 .5730 ^.3722
Carburetor Modifications for Feedback Control Unit
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT AT THE VEHICLE LEVEL
Part
Vendor Tools
Costs and
(VC) R&D Equip
Corp Corp Dealer RPE
Allocation Profit Markup Vehicle
.20 VC .20 VC .40 VC Level
FB Carburetor *»3722 .3000
.87** 1.7*89 8.1700
160
RATM & STRONG
INCQBPOIATED
-------
Carburetor Modification for Feedback Control Unit
COST COMPARISON TO AFTERMARKET SELLING PRICES
No aftermarket selling prices are available for a feedback carburetor.
An estimated after-market delta might be: 4 x (VC Costs) = 4 x (VC Costs)
k x ft.37 " $17.49.
Carburetor Modification for Feedback Control Unit
COST METHODOLOGY
Since we are dealing with a delta change for the carburetor modifications to provide
feedback capabilities, all the costs are based on assumptions.
The weight and cost data are estimates based on judgments using the Chrysler
sketches.
Carburettor Modification for Feedback Control Unit
APPLICATIONS
The feedback carburetor Is associated with the 3-way catalysts
systems. The applications to various engines Is similar
to the design presented by Hoi ley.
161
RATH * STRONG
INCO«PD«ATCD
-------
5
; I
n
o a,
II ~
2 (0
5 H
' S
Z
0
FIGURE 3
FEEDBACK CARBURETOR SCHEMATIC DRAWING
FEEDBACK CONTROLLED
IDLE AIR BLEED
CONTROL VACUUM
CONNECTION
FIXED IDLE
AIR BLEED
MAIN METERING JET
FEEDBACK CONTROLLED
MAIN SYSTEM FUEL
-------
IE - HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
1. Electronic Control Unit (Microprocessor)
The detailed descriptions and calculations following this page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978. The
costs stown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used far automobiles is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent coats for trucks are shawn below.
Automobile
Unit Cost
Material
Labor and Overhead
Equipment
Tooling
18.00
21,70
.09
Weighted EOS Factor
Automobile Retail Price Equivalent
Truck Retail Price Equivalent
2.1
$101.21
$212.54
163
RATH A STRONG
-------
Electronic Control Unit (with sensor Inputs for controlling modulaisd
AIR, modulated EGR, modulated A/F, an«i»moduiated spark advance)
Electronic Control Unit
Part
ECU Assy
Power Transistor
Rectifier
T2L 14 Pin DIP
Low Power Trans
Signal Trans
Carbon Resist
Capacitor
Ceramic Resistor
PC Boards
Conn and Pins
Press Transducer
Outer Shell
Other
MANUFACTURING COSTS
Bill of Material
Mat
Costs
Purch. Labor Overhead
15. 5G 6.200
2.00
1.00
2.00
.80
2.00
.80
2.00
.50
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.90
Mfg.
Costs
21.70 Test
2.00
1.00
2.00
.80
2.00
.80
2.00
.50
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.90
Totals
18.00
15.50 6.20
39.70
Based on current technology--not on LSI technology--LSI technology would probably
be 30 to 50% less.
164
RATH A STRONG
I»COI*0«*TIO
-------
electronic Control Unit
Economic 1-Year
Volume Recurring
Part Per Year Tooling
.0100
ECU Unit 2,000,000 20,000
TOOL ING
Amortizdtion
3-Year Non
Recurring
Tooling
.0100
60 , 000 1
COSTS
per Pieci;
12-Ye.ir 12-Year
Machinery Launching
Equipment Costs
.0625 .006?.
,500,000 150,000
40-Year Amortization
Land & Per
Buildings Piece
L
.0087 B
Lean
Burn
-------
Electron!c Control Unit
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
Mat.
Costs
Labor
Costs
Over-
Head
Mfg.
(MC)
Costs
Tooling
Corp.
.20MC
Alloc
Corp.
.20MC
Profit
Plant/
Vendor
Coats
ECU 18.00 15.50 6'20 39.70 .0887 7.540 7.940 55.67
21JO
H & D - 2,000,000/year for 3 years for 2,000,000/year * l.OOQG R£D per vehicle.
166
RATH A STRONG
f
-------
Electronic Control Unit
ECU Unit
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT AT THE VEHICLE LEVEL
Vendor/
Mfg.
Costs
(VC)
1 QOlS
and
R&D Equip
Corp
Allocation
.20 VC
Corp
Profit
.20 VC
Dealer
Markup
.40 VC
Vehicle
Retail
Price
Equiv,
55.67
1.00
11.13
11.13
22.27
101,21
This estimate is based on today's technology. Using learning curve data from the electronics
industry, we can assume a28t cost improvement for every doubled quantity. (Includes LSI
technology).
Volume
2,000,030
4,000,000
8,000,000
16,000,000
32,000,000
RPE
101.21
72.87
52.47
37.73
27-20
167
RATH * STRONG
-------
Electronic Control Unit
AFTERMARKET ANALYSIS
The ECU units are being sold for $60 to $90 in the aftermarket with the VW unit at
$222. The discount formula of i compiles the following:
1/4 Discount
AFT SP $60.00 15.00 (modulator)
AFT SP 90.00 25.00 (Ford modulator)
AFT SP 222.00 55.50 (VW - ECU)
Electronic Control Unit
COST METHODOLOGY
The material cost data are estimates from a plant visitation. The tooling and
process data were obtained from the same source.
168
RATH A STRONG
-------
Electronic Control Unit
COST METHODOLOGY
'96*
1968
19TS
10 20 50 100 200
INOUSTWrS ACCUMULATED IXJ»f RIENCE (MILLIONS OF UNITS)
500
1.000 2,000
PfUCES OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS k**« eonf-ratd to at ft.
ptncacc earn commoa lo m«jjy Mustriw, d«Unn| tboul 21 ptr>
crat wit^ tadu«tri««.
169
RATM A STRONG
-------
Fig. 1 Operational Flow Diagram
Operation
Incoming (10)
Inspection
Board 1
Board 2
Automatic
Component insertion (15)
Individual semi-automatic
insertion of power, semi -
conductor & i C1 s (7)
Flow Solder (2)
1st unit test (parts test)
and print out for trouble
shoot (2)
2nd unit test
(functional) (2)
Laser trim of ceramic resistor*
(trim to functional performance
S trouble shoot} (&)
Automatic potting (4)
Post pat test (2)
ECU Assembly (6)
Test (2)
Burn in (2)
Test (2)
Rack SShip (2)
Remarks
100% temperature test
of *ll semiconductors
about 50 parts per board, 1
part per station
Silicone
85'
85°C 8 hrs
Total production operators
per shift (63)
* undefined of 12 = 75 tola!
170
RATH & STRONQ
-------
Table I
Test Equipment Estimate
Incoming Inspection
1st unit test - parts
2nd unit test
Laser resister term
Post potting test
Burn in racks £
test monitor
Total unit test
6 units at 40K each $240,000
2 units at «OK 80,000
2 units plus computer 100,000
1 unit 75^000
2 units at 25K 50,000
14 at 30,000
1 at 30,000
+ undefined
120.000
30,000
695,000
305,000
1,000,000
171
RATH & STRON13
-------
Table H
Estimated Production Equipment
Automatic parts insertion 100 0 1000 each 100.000
Parts insertion transport line 2 820,000 40,000
Automatic Potting line 1650,000 50,000
Flow Soldex Machine
(2 parallel lines in 1 machine) 30,000
Special stepping, assembly stations 100.OOP
320,000
other undefined 180,COO
500.000
172
WATH & STRONG
-------
Electron Con tro1 UnIt
APPLICATIONS
The variations in costs of ECU units will be dependent on the
number of cylinders. The deltas will not be significant at this
stage of technology.
173
RATH & STRONG
INCdXFBIATtD
-------
IF - SENSORS, HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
1. Oxygen Sensor
The detailed description! and calculations following this page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978. The
costs shown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
par yearj for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Material
Labor and Overhead
Equipment
Tooling
Automobile
Unit Cost
.484
.151
.090
,033
Weighted EOS Factor
X Automobile Retail
= Truck Retail Price
Price Equivalent
Equivalent
EOS
Factor
1.3
2.7
2.4
3.4
1.8
$2.78
$5.00
174
RATH « STRONG
IHCaiPOKATCB
-------
The oxygen sensor Is an essential component of most
three-way catalyst systems and Is used to maintain
£ control of air-fuel ratio at or near sto Ichlometr!c.
With most catalysts, this "window" for effective
performance Is exceedingly narrow, being the order
of ^ 0.1 A/F r a 11 c- units. The oxygen sensor provides
a feedback loop to an electronic control unit.
175
RATH A STRONG
IMCVMOIATIO
-------
•a
<•!"*
C5-"..
SI
SL
176
-------
Oxygen Sensor
BILL OF MATERIAL
Part
Oxygen Sensor
Air Inlet
Insulator
Nut. Body
Electrodes
Zirconium Dioxide
Platinum
Total
Hose
Electric
Total Oxygen
Vehicle Assem
Enaine Modification
Total Vehicle
Installation
Material
Assem
Brass
Plastic
Brass
Copper
Zr°2
Platin
Wire 5
Insulator
Weight
.100
.020
.015
,OSQ
.005
.010
,000016
.100
.200
-
-
Wat
Costs
-
.3200
.0150
.0500
,0100
.0500
.0397
. 1847
. 100
.200
-
-
Labor
.0312
.0156
.0078
.0156
.0078
.0078
.0078
.0936
-
-
.0312
.0625
Labor
Over-
Head
.0125
.0062
.0031
.0062
.0031
.0031
.0031
.0373
-
-
.0125
.0250
Mfg
Costs Reference
.0437 Bendix
,0418
.0259
.0718
.0209
.0609
.0506 See RHF 2/77
.1000
.2000
.31 36
.02*37
.0875 ECU Unit
.7^*68
177
RATH A STRONG
-------
Oxygen Sensor System—Tooling Costs—Amortization Per Part
Part
Oxygen Sensor
Air Inlet
Insulator
N ul- Body
Electrodes
ZrO
2
Platinum
Tolal
Hose
Electric
Total System
Vehicle Assem
Engine Modification
Tolal Vehicle Systems
Economic
Volume
5.000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
5,000.000
5,000,000
300,000
300,000
1 Year
Recurring
Tooling
.0100
50,000
.0040
20,000
.0010
20.000
.0100
50,000
.0020
10.000
.0020
10,000
.0100
50,000
.0120
.0010
20,000
.0040
20,000
.0167
5,000
.0333
10,000
3 Year Non-
Recurring
Tool Ing
.0050
75,000
.0040
60,000
.0040
60.000
.0100
150,000
.0020
30,000
.0020
30,000
.0100
150,000
.0370
.0017
25,000
.0017
25,000
.0333
30,000
.0222
20,000
12 Year
Machinery
€ Equip
.0020
120,000
.0020
120,000
.0020
120,000
.0040
240,000
.0010
60.300
.0010
60,000
.0010
210,000
.0160
.0025
150,000
.0025
150,000
.0056
20,000
.0083
30,000
12 Year
Launching
Costs
.0002
12,000
.0002
12,000
.0002
12,000
.0004
24.000
.0001
6,000
.0001
6,000
.0004
24,000
.0016
.0002
IS, 000
.0002
15,000
.0006
2,000
,0006
2,000
10 Year Amortization
Land e Per
Buildings Piece
.0172
.0102
.0102
.0244
.0051
.0051
.0244
.0966
.0064
.0084
.0562
.0644
, 2340
R&D Estimates: $600.000 for 3 years, or .67 per vehicle for engineering development.
-------
0 x y g enSen so r System
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
Plant Plant .20 MC Mfg/
Over- Mfg Tooling . 2QMC Corp Vendor
Part Mat Labor Head Costs Exp. Inv. Corp Profit Costs
Oxygen Sensor .1847 .0936 .037** .3157 .0790 .0176 .0631 .0631 .5335
Hose .100 - - .1000 .0057 .0027 .0200 .0200 . H84
Electric ._2QO : .2000 .0057 .0027 .0^00 .0*400„.2884
Total System .9752
179
RATH A STRONG
I !50«»C«»TCO
-------
Oxygen Sensor Syitem
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
AT THE VEHICLE LEVEL
Plant
Vender
Part Costs
R6D
Tools
E-
Equip
Corp
AUoc
.20 VC
Corp
Profit
.20 VC
Dealer
Markup
.40VC
Vehicle
Retail Price
Equivalent
Oxygen Sensor
Hose
Electric
Vehicle Assem
Engine Mod
..5385 .5667
.1484
.2884
.0437
.0875
.1077
.0297
. 0577
.0562 .0087
.0644 .0175
.1077
.0297
.0577
.0087
.0175
.2154
.0594
.1154
.0175
.0350
1.6360
.26?!
.5191
.1349
.2219
Total Vehicle
Price Equivalent
2.7790
180
RATH A STRONQ
-------
Oxygen Sensor System
Cost Comparison to Aftermarket Selling Prices
Using the aftermarket selling prices obtained from various company
sources and aftermarket discount data, the following analysis is projected:
Oxygen Sensor
Discount 1/H
Discount 1/5
Mathey
Bishop
M/B
6.00
1. 50
1.40
Mercedes
M/B
12.00
3.00
2.240
The estimated vendor costs are. 5383 . The retail price equivalent for
the valve on the vehicle is 1 .6360.
181
RATH A STRONG
l«EO!Ma'*TI0
-------
Oxygen Sensja^System
Cost Methodo1 opy
The weight data was obtained using a Chrysler weight
table for a spark plug. The material costs are
compiled using the 1977 AMM mill prices.
The labor costs are estimates of production costs
using today's technology and the assumed economies
of scale. The platinum loading was obtained from
EPA (Mr. Field) computations. The tooling costs are
estimates of the expendable tools and the machinery
and equipment required to produce the components.
The assembly costs and the engine changes were
Included fn the costs at the vehicle level.
Oxygen Sensor System
Applications of the 0 System
The Bendix and Bosch systems are similar designs. We have assumed
that this sensor will not vary by engine size although it is possible that
more than one sensor could be used in an electronically controlled
three-way catalyst system.
182
RATH A STRONG
-------
"at
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
2. Spark Knock Sensor
The detailed descriptions and calculations following this p-,..ge apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978. The
coats shown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobile* and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown belcw.
Weighted EOS Factor 2.1
Automobile Retail Price Equivalent $60 - 90
Truck Retail Price Equivalent $126 - 189
183
RATH & STRONG
INCO»FO«*TtD
-------
Spark Knock Sensor (with piezo electric accelerometer or pickup)
The data for these systems are very limited at the time of this Deport.
Detailed bills of material are not available so only a gross estimate is
feasible. It is only a judgement cost estimate based on experience.
Spark Knock Sensor
The manufacturing costs of the knock sensor based on the schematic
drawing indicates that a $40 to $60 cost will be a likely cost.
The RPE costs including the accelerometer is estimated to be $60 to $90
per unit.
No aftermarket data are available at this date.
Further work is necessary to develop specific cost data.
184
RATH A STRONG
-------
KNOCK SENSOR
(Nonpfoduction Item)
OOP-
o
a.
O
u
a.
v>
B
t-
•e
a
_j
o
p<>
I 01
a g
«- o
a cj
.
I
I/) O
u
V! 5
11
U
X
w
185
RATH A STRON3
-------
IF - HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINE
3. Sensors and Transducers
The detailed descriptions and calculations following this page apply to passenger
cai* parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - QQZ, March, 1978, The
costs shown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS user for automobiles is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Sensor
RPE
Air Temperature
Water Temperature
Pressure Regulator
Speed
Throttle Switch
$1.67
1.67
3.43
1.00
3.07
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
$3.51
3.51
7.20
2.10
6.45
186
RATH & STRONG
iMCOMDIATCD
-------
187
RATH ft CTRONQ
-------
Transducers and Sensors
(Types H.O temperature, Inlet air temperature, throttle ooslclon,
transmission gear, EGR plntol position, crank angle, humidity.)
Some of these sensors are included in the cost analysis of EFI
and ECU data.
37.i Transducers and Sensors
37.2 Transducers and Sensors
37.3 Transducers and Sensors
37.ft Transducers and Sensors—Manufacturing Costs and RPE Costs
Using data from the Electronic fuel metering system , we have:
5000 K
Sensor Mfg./Vendor RPE
O, Sensor 1.75 3.15
Air Temperature .93 1.67
H2O .93 1.67
Pressure Regulator 1.91 3.43
Speed Sensor .56 1.00
Throttle Switch 1.71 3.07
These data include tooling amortization.
188
RATH A STRONG
-------
Transducers and Sensors
The afterrnarket cost comparison data are limited to foreign car data and
are not useful for analysis.
Transducers and Sensors
Cost Methodology. The learning curve analysis was used in these units.
Applications
The engine applications are similar except for the number of injectors.
189
RATH & STRONG
iMCQIPOIATCg
-------
ELECTRON 1C EHGIME CONTROLS
PURSE
CONTROL
THROTTLE POSITION
ECR SOLENOID VALVE
SONIC EGR VALVE
ECR VALVI
POSITION SENSOR
•INJECTCS.S
MANIFOLD PRESSURE
SENSOR
CRANK POSITION " %
SENSOR 1 *
V^ "»^
BAROMETRIC /• \ -
CANNSTIR j PRESSURE | >LA
__-^ SENSOR J -^ '
>CATALYST
* ^^^fc. j\ Tl/J *-4 f ff-^
fgg ACTUATORS
CI3 CONTROLLER
OSIERS .LwMno
SENSOR
SONIC THftOTTLE 6CCV
BY-PASS AC.iUA.TOR
VOtiAGE Di
IGNITION MODULE
, I^rrAK£ CHARGE
T6MPER*TUR£ SENSOR
SECONDARY AIR
SWTCHINS
VALVE
190
-------
OEM COSTS—8-CYL1NDER SYSTEM
Industry Estimates
Quantity
Injectors
0 Sensor
ECU
Air Temperature
HO Temperature
Throttle Switch
Fuel Pump Assembly
Fuel Pressure Regulator
Fast Idle Valve
Throttle Body
Air Solenoid Valve
Fuel Filter
Fuel Rail
Speed Sensor
Intake Manifold
Wiring Harness
5 K
$ 56.00
6.00
75.00
1.7S
1.75
3.00
15.00
3.00
5.00
10.00
4.00
3.50
8.50
1.50
25.20
$219.20
200 K
$ 40.00
1.50
45.00
1.75
1.75
3.00
15.00
2.90
3.51
8.78
3.25
2.00
6.00
1.00
10.00
$1'48.44
500 K
$ 32.00
2.36
45.00
1.25
1.25
2.30
12.00
2.57
2.00
5.00
2.00
1.00
5.00
.75
5.00
$119.48
Projected Estimates
1,000 K
$ 29.25
2.16
41.13
1.14
1.14
2.10
10. §7
2.35
1.83
a. s?
1.83
.91
4.57
.69
4.57
$109.21
5,000 K
$ 23.74
1.75
33.39
.93
.93
1.71
8.90
1.91
1.48
3.71
1.50
.74
3.71
.56
3.71
$ 88.67
191
RATM & STRQNQ
-------
Sundstran j Data Control, Inc.
•»••••». •..»*«-., - ^—>«,
• -I**
. ^TJSTI.1*
I •> Series
PIEZOTRON*
• UjJ. Pi!«nl Na. 3,369,747
Hydraulic Pressure Gages
r',
tar
9M SERIES
PRESSURE
GAGE
ADAPTOR
///-• fl/fn\\ \ r/77/7 >!?//>'/ ~7:
i\v\\\\W
Features
• RUGGED & RELIABLE-
100,000,000 CYCLES
• SMALL SIZE-MOUNTS IN 1/4" LINES
» HIGH LEVEL OUTPUT-
5 VOLTS FULL SCALE
» HIGH RESOLUTION
MEASURES 10,000 to 0.5 psi, or
1,000 to 0.05 with one sensor
» EASE OF INSTALLATION
Th« 205 Series Hydraulic Pressur»*Gag8 was
specifically designed FOR DYNAMIC HYDRAULIC
PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS. Practically inde-
structible, with a hardened 17-4 PH stainless steel
body, and tested for 100,000.000 cycles, t" ey com-
bine ths stability, wide frequency response and
high resolution of a quartz element with a high level
output signal, compatible with most readout equip-
ment. This is made possible with our revolu-
tionary Piezotron concept whereby a miniature cir-
cuit is built into the housing to convert the quartz
piezoelectric-generated charge to a robust, low
impedance voltage.
UNLIKE A STRAIN GAGE, the 205 Gages are
designed for flush mounting in lines as small as
1/4" I.D., where its tensing surface "sees" the
pressure changes jou need to know, thereby elim-
inating cavitaticn effects. A truly dynamic instru-
ment, with natural frequency of more than 250,000
Hz, IT DOESNT MISS HALF YOUR DATA. A 25,000
to 1 signal-to-noise ratio with an output of 5 volts
full scale allows you to read your whole dynamic
pressure spectrum, accurately, with one sansor.
Designed to Measure Pump Ripple—Hydraulic Line Surges
Pipe Lin* Pulsations—Actuator Performance—Fuel Injection Pressure
Brake Systems Efficiency—Hydraulic Controls—Tubing Endurance
192
-------
V)
IX
8
i
>s
H' J
Kn f
'is
V,
TT
%
T {
i!
j
•:t
^l
I
I
-I
a
i
4
s
.1
a.
1
I
!
1111:
193
-------
IG - ACTUATORS-HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINE
1. EGR Valy.? Position Actuator
This is included in Section IB-1, EGR systems, representing 33% of the
system.
194
RATH A STRONG
i«CO«H5»ATID
-------
IG - HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINE
2. Turbgcharger Wastegate Position Actuator
This is a portion of the turbocharger estimate, Section IK.
195
RATH & STRONG
IMCaiPOffATtO
-------
IG - HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINE
3. Secondary Air Modulation, Vacuum Control
The detailed descriptions and calculations following thi» page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002| March, 1978. The
costs shown therein have been adjusted by u*ing factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing yolume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobile! i« 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Automobile EOS
Unit Costs Factor
Material .460 1.3
Labor and Overhead .574 2.7
Equipment .027 2.4
Tooling .152 3.4
Weighted EOS Factor 2.3
X Automobile Retail Price Equivalent $3.22
= Truck Retail Price Equivalent $7.41
196
RATH A STRONG
-------
AIR MODULATION SYSTEM WITH VACUUM CONTROL
The air modulation system provides an appropriate volume of
secondary air to the exhaust ports (or to a point between
th« 3-way catalyst and the oxidation catalyst) dependent
upon both engine speed and load or, In other words, the
volume of engine exhaust. This system attempts to more
nearly match this alr supply with engine needs for optimum
oxidation of HC and CO while minimizing the cooling effect
this air has on the exhaust gases. It consists of a dlverter
type valve that is actuated by a vacuum signal from Intake
manifold that In turn provides air to the exhaust stream.
Same as air Injection syste.n except
- -TVS
-, ('"9 to
H*J,
it
-('••
'
197
RATH A STRONQ
-------
Air Modulation System
Tooling Costs—Amortization Per Part
12 Year
3D
•<
Z
(0
H
a
0
z
0
Economic
Part Volume
Dlverter Valve 2,500,000
Converter Nose 2,500,000
M
00 Vacuum Hose 2,500,000
Al r Hani fold 2 ,500,000
Total
1 Year
Recurring
Tooling
.0580
145,000
.0040
10,000
.0004
1 ,000
.0200
50,000
.0824
3 Year Machinery
Nonrecurring and
Tooling
.0580
435,000
.0016
12,090
.0002
1 ,500
.0100
75,000
.0698
Equipment
.0167
500,000
.0026
78,000
.0003
7,800
.0050
120,000
.0247
12 Year 40 Year
Launching Land and
Costs Building
.0017
50,000
.0003
7,800
.0001
3,000
.0005
12,000
.0026
Amortization
Per Piece Reference
.1343 6.2
.0085 Dlverter Valve
.0010 Tooling Data
.0355 "
.1793
Vehicle Assem.
Engine Hod.
500,000
500,000
Research and Development Estimate: $150,000 for 3 years, or $.1000 Per Piece
-------
Air Modulation Syslem
Dill of Material
Manufacturing Costs
21
-I
I
8"
W
3B
0
2
0
Purt
Diverter Valve
Converter Hoce
Vacuum Hose
Air Manifold
Total ,
Vehicle Assem.
Engine Mod.
Vehicle Total
Material
Steel
Rubber
Rubber
Steel
Weight
1.230
.500
.050
.100
Material
Costs
.3300
.1000
.0100
.0200
Labor
Costs
.3455
.03(2
.or. ii
.0512
Labor
Overhead
.1374
.0125
.0012
.0125
Manufacturing
Costs
.8109
.1437
.0143
.0637
1.0326
.0625
.0156
.0250
.0062
.U875
.0218
1. 11)19
Reference
Sketch and
EPA Data
-------
Air Modulation System--Total Manufacturing Costa
30
H
X
* 8
o
tt
-1
7)
0
z
0
Part
Diverter Valve
Converter Hose
Vacuum Hose
Air Manifold
Total
Material
.3300
,1000
.0100
.0200
Labor
.3435
.0312
.0031
.0321
Plant
Overhead
.1374
.0125
.0012
.0125
Plant
Mfg.
Costs
.8109
.1437
.0143
.0637
Tooling
Exp.
.1160
.0056
.0006
.0300
Inv.
.0184
.0029
.0004
.0055
Corp.
A Hoc.
,20MC«
.1622
.0287
.0029
.0127
Corp.
Profit
.20MC«
.1622
.0287
,00X3
.0127
Vendor
Mfq.
Costs
1.2637
.2097
.0210
. 12*7
1.625!
-------
Air Modulation System Retail Price Equivalent At The Vehicle Level
Part
Plant Tools Corp.
Vendor and Alfoc.
Costs RAD Equip. .20VC»
Vehicle
Corp. Dealer Retail
Profit Markup Price
.ZOVC* .ftOVC* Equivalent
J.
W
H
a
o
z
ho
o
Air Mod. System 1.6251
Vehicle Assem. .0875
Engine Mod. ,02 ! 8
Total RPE
.1000
3250 .3250 .6500 3.0252
.0175 .0175 .0350 .1575
OO'i'i .00^ .0087 .0392
3.2219
-------
AIR MODULATION SYSTEM COST COMPARISON
TO AFTERMARKET SELLING PRICES
An assumption was made that the air modulation valve woulo be similar to a
diverter valve. (See E.P.A. sketch)
A diverter valve is priced at $18.05
I/ft discount = 4.51
1/5 discount = 3.61
The RPE estimate Is 3,0252 for the valve and the hoses. The
manufacturing (vendor) estimate Is 1,6251 for the valve and an
added .1093 for the engine and assembly costs.
AIR MODULATION SYSTEM COST METHODOLOGY
The estimates were based on the diverter valve costs developed in the air injection
section 6.0.
Other costs of the engine modifications and the assembly are estimates of the
Incremental changes required for this system.
AlR MODULATION SYSTEM
APPLICATIONS TO VARIOUS ENGINES
No significant engine-to-engine costs are evident.
202
RATM A STRONG
-------
I H - THERMAL REACTOR
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINE
The detailed descriptions and calculation.! following this psge apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978. The
costs shown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles end trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Automobile
Unit Costs
Material
Labor and Overhead
Equipment
Tooling
12.93
.52
,65
.43
1.3
2.7
2.4
3.4
Weighted EOS Factor
X Automobile Retail Price Equivalent
1.5
$37.62
Truck Retail Price Equivalent
$56.43
203
RATM A STRONG
INCORPOHATKO
-------
Thermal Reactor (Insulated With Core and Insulated Without Core)
Thermal reactors have been used to promote the gas-phase oxidation
of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide. Excess oxygen and high
temperatures are required to insure efficient oxidation. Early versions
have required a fuel-rich exhaust and air injection to insure that high
thermal-reactor temperatures could be maintained. Such a system was
particularly suited to the rotary engine because of its inherently high
hydrocarbon exhaust levels. Unfortunately, the requirement to operate
the engine fue! rich necessarily results in decreased fuel economy.
Better design of the thermal-reactor system appears to allow use of a lean
thermal reactor which would not suffer the fuel economy penalty of the
rich thermal reactor. Air injection might still be required to insure that
the oxidizing mixture is available at all engine operating conditions.
Many lean-burn engines also include a simple thermal reactor, often no
more than a somewhat enlarged, thermally insulated exhaust manifold.
Because of the lower exhaust temperatures of the lean-burn engines,
thermal reactor performance is limited but usually adequate to give
approximately a 501 reduction in hydrocarbons. Sines the introduction
of the oxidation catalyst, thermal reactors are now found primarily on
rotary, lean-burn, and stratified-charge engines.
204
RATH & STRONG
IMCOIPOffATIO
-------
Thermal Reactor
Thermal Reactor Configuration
From E»hiy« fan
Ceramic Liner
from S »hatyi Port
Intulitor
\
To Exhiun fipt
f
205
RATH & STRONG
INCORPORATED
-------
Thermal Reactor Manufacturing Costs
Bill of Material
'•-Cylinder Engine
a
H
I
hO
OS
-4
Part
Exhaust Manifold
Liners
Core Liners
Core
Insulation
Material
Cast Iron
Ceramic
H.T. Steel
H.T. Steel
Asbestos
Weight
14.75
2.00
2.00
3.00
t.oo
Material
Costs
4.4250
4.0000
2.0000
2.0000
.5000
Labor
Costs
.1250
.0413
.0413
.1250
.0413
Labor
Overhead
.0500
.0165'
.0165
.0500
.0165
Manufacturing
Costs
4.6000
4.0578
2.0578
2.1750
-SS78
2J
0
z
0
Total
Vehicle ASM
£ng. Mod
.1250
.1250
.0500
.0500
Reference
.30/lb. EPA sketch
$2/lb.
$50/lb.
.1750
.1750
Total
13.7984
-------
J
I I
n (vi
o a, a
5 ~j
! 5
i"i TTI
a ™
0
z
n
ggsF|3^*?:*T^ "•-*--'•••< ^
1 Year
Economic Recurring
Part Volume Tooling
.1250
Exhaust Manifold 400,000 50,000
.0200
Liners 1,000,000 20,000
.0100
Care Liners 1,000,000 10,000
.0500
Core 400,000 20,000
.0100
Insulation 1,000,000 10,000
Total
.0250
Vehicle ASM 400,000 10,000
.0250
Engine Mod 400,000 10,000
Thermal Reactor Tooling Costs
Amortisation
3 Year
Nonrecurring
Tooling
.1250
150,000
.0200
60,000
.0100
30,000
.0500
60,000
.0100
30,000
.0250
30,000
.0250
30,000
Per Piece
12 Year
Machinery
and
Equipment
.5000
2,400,000
.0200
240,000
.0100
120,000
.0500
240,000
.0100
120,000
.0250
120,000
.0250
120,000
12 Year
Launchinc
Costa
.0500
240,000
.0020
24 ,000
.0010
12,000
.0050
24,000
.0010
12,000
' .0025
12,000
.0025
12,000
Building Per Piece
.8000
.0620
.0310
.1550
.0310
1,0790
.0775
Research & Development - $400,000 per year for 3 years for 400,000 pieces per year or $1.0000 per vehtcli
-------
Thermal Reactor Total Manufacturing Costs
n
a
M
H
0
z
0
g
Part
i_iners
Core Liners
Core
Insulation
Totzil
Material
4.4250
4.0000
2.0000
2.0000
.5000
Labor
.1250
.0413
.0413
.1250
.0413
Plant
Overhead
.0500
.0165
.0165
.0500
/0165
Plant
Mfg.
Costs
fc.6ooo
4.0578
2.0578
2.1750
.5578
Tool
Exp.
.2500
.0400
.0200
.1000
.0200
ing
Inv.
.5500
.0220
,0110
.0550
.0110
Corp.
Alloc.
.20MC»
.9200
.8116
.4116
.4350
.1116
Corp.
Profit
.20MC»
.9200
.81 1C-
.4116
.4350
.1116
Vendor
Mfg.
Costs
7.2400
5.7*29
2.91 19
3.2000
.81 19
19.9067
*MC = Manufacturing Costs
-------
Thermal Reactor Retail Price Lquivolent
Part
Plant Tools Corp. Corp.
Vet.dor and Alloc. Profit
Costs R&D Equip. .20VC« .20VC»
Vehicle
Dealer Retail
Markup Price
.40VC* Equivalent
Thermal Reactor 19.9067 1.000
3-9013 3.9813 8/962? 36.8321
5 »
w
0
z
Q
Vehicle
Engine Mod
Total
.1750
.1750
.0775 .035D .0350 .0700 .3925
.0775 .OJ50 .0350 .0700 .3925
37.6171
The uninsulated thermal reactor costs are$35.37 excluding vehicle assembly and engine mod I f I cat loni.
*VC = Vendor Costs
-------
Thermal Reactor Cost Comparison To Aftermarket Selling Prices
The Mazda Rotary Engines are selling the thermal reactors for $186.93 to $255.19
for RX-2 amd RX-3 engines. This selling price includes a five year warranty.
Using discount data:
186.93 Est. Vendor Costs Retail Price Equivalent
Discount 1/4 4fc.73
Discount 1/5 37.40 19.83 37.49
The exhaust manifold on a CVCC Honda sells for $79.20. Using the discount
formula, the vendor cost is 79.20 -t 4 = $19.80,
Thermal Reactor Cost Methodology
The weight data are estimates based on 4 cylinder exhaust data. The material
costs are estimates based on material selections.
The design data are from the sketch in 19.0.
210
RATH a STRONG
JHC01POHATCD
-------
II - IGNITION SYSTEMS
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINE
1. Breaker Point Ignition System
The detailed descriptions and calculations following this page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978. The
costs shown therein have been adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
per yeari for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Automobile
Unit Costs
Material 2.35
Labor and Overhead 6.41
Equipment .OS
Tooling .33
Weighted EOS Factor
X Automobile Retail Price Equivalent
= Truck Retail Price Equivalent
EOS
Factor
1.3
2.7
2-4
3.4
2,4
$23.28
$55.87
211
RATH & STRONG
INCOIPOIATEII
-------
Breakerpolnt Ignition System
The breakerpolnt distributor his been the mainstay of Ignition
systems. The advent of the emissions requirements created the
need for Improved designs such as the electronic IgltFon lystem
defined In 26.0.
VER, Dimibytof Cip
CAPACITOR,
— HARNESS. Moduli » d*3
CS.-( ^ Dji,.^o, Madu!i Anssh<
P-"""' A ,«».p%OTORASSy.,OUifl6iaer
SCflEW
CRFYf
SHICLO.D'ntfiSutor
ȣ'''
c;:
i
c
\
t"
^_'-!r»SrRiNG,D:«ibwt6fWtifh: V
**"
"~\
f
a
i
%
f*
• •*
• -r--'J nUUSINQ AMT_ U1SUU
—"•4
»l
'•I
"t
--1
sg
-£ ^-— C2AR
^--*---^x''IN
t/^-^
VJ
toplod «d wiw ol H.EJ. flt ^Kvtor CTjptetJ). M
-------
Breakerpoint Ignition Syitem
MANUFACTURING COSTS
Bill of Material
Part
Overhead Mfg.
Mat. Labor Labor Plant
Mat. Weight Costs Costs Costs Costs
Distributor
Assembly
Cap
Rotor
Breakerpoints
Condenser
Vacuum
Control
Ignition
Coil
Plastic
Steel 2,000 1.000 2.800 1.1200
Plastic .150
Plastic
Copper .050
Copper .010
.1200 .3500 .1400
.0100 .1000 .0400
.0080 .1200 .0480
Plastic
Copper .050 .0400 .1100 .0440
Steel
Copper .200
.1000 .3500 .1400
Copper
°lastic 1.780 1.0680 .7500 .3000
4.92CO
.6100
.1500
. 1760
.1940
.5900
2.1180
Total
213
RATH & STRONG
INCtHPOIATCO-
-------
Breakerpuint Ignition System
TOOLING COSTS
Amortization per Piece
^
-i
I
W ^
•i
0
z
0
Part
Distributor Assembly
Cap
Rotor
Breakerpoints
Conderser
Vacuum Contl
Ignition Coil
Economic
Volume
Per Year
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1-Year
Recurring
Tooling
.0500
50,000
.0100
10,000
.0050
5000
.0050
5000
.0300
30,000
.0?00
30,000
.0300
30,000
3-Year Non
Recurring
Tooling
.0500
150,000
.0100
30,000
.0100
30,000
.0100
30,000
.0300
90,000
.0300
90,000
.0300
90,000
12-Year
Machinery
Equipment
.0500
600,000
.0100
120,000
.0050
60,000
.0050
60,000
.0050
60,000
.0050
60,000
.0050
60,000
12-Year
Launching
Costs
.0050
60,000
.0010
12,000
.0005
6000
.0005
6000
.0005
6000
.ono5
6000
.0005
6flOO
40- Year Amortization
Land & Per
Buildings Piece
.1550
.0310
.0205
.0205
.0655
.0655
.0655
Total
.4235
-------
Breakerpoint Ignition System
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
H
I
P»
cn
o
2
0
Part
Dist. Assembly
Cap
Rotor
Breaker Points
Condenser
Vacuum Coil
Ignition Coil
Total
Mat
1.000
.1200
.0100
.0080
.0400
.1000
1.0680
Labor
2.8000
.3500
.1000
.1200
.1100
.3500
.7500
Plant
Over-
Head
1.1200
.WOO
.0400
.0480
.0440
.1400
.3000
Plant
Mfg
Costs
(MC)
4-?200
.6100
.1500
.1760
.1940
.5900
2.1180
8.7580
Tooling
Exp.
.1000
.0200
.0150
.0150
.0600
.0600
.0600
Inv.
.0550
.0110
.0055
.0055
.0055
.0055
.0055
.20/MC
Corp.
Alloc.
.9840
. 1220
.0300
.0352
.0388
.1180
.4236
, 20/MC
Corp.
Profit
.9840
. 1220
.0300
.0352
.0388
.1180
.4236
1
Mfg/
Vendo
Costs
7.0430
.8850
.2305
.2669
.3371
.8915
3.0307
2.6847
-------
Breakerpoint Ignition System
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT AT THE VEHICLE LEVEL
z I
n
m *
S (A
3 a
O "»
o
z
Is)
Dist, System
Vehicle Assy
Vendor
Casts
(VC) R&D
I2.68i»7 —
.2500 ~
Tools
and
Equip
«s <•
..
-
Corp
Allocation
.20 VC
2.5369
.0500
Corp
Profit
.20 VC
2.5369
.0500
Dealer
Markup
.40 VC
5.0739
.1000
Vehicle
Retail
Price
Equiv.
22.8325
.4500
Total RPE
23.2825
-------
Dronknrpoint Ignition Systnm
Group 2 (Chilton)
Ignition System (Chrysler
Aftermarket Selling Price Analysis
Breakerless Distribution Assembly
1972 Data
High Energy Ignition
1977 Data
Six Cyl 39.80
8 Cyl 318 46.25
8 Cyl 400 53.15
i I
n
o p> r^
" Cj Distribution Cap
S W
> -< Points
S *
0 Condenser
Q Dial Lead Wires
Rotor
Reluctor
Pick up and Plate
Breaker Plates
Vacuum Control Unit
Coil
Resistors
Governor Shaft Assembly
Dist Housing
6 Cyl
4.25
3.30
1.60
.82
1.25
--
--
10.50
5.35
14.92
2.55
14.95
6.07
8 Cyl
4.85
3.30
1.60
.82
1.25
--
--
10.50
5.35
14.92
2.55
14.95
8.69
Total Assembly
45.00
47.55
54.75
6 Cyl
3.81
--
--
1.92
1.92
13.45
--
5.35
--
--
14.95
6.07
a Cyl
4.85
._
--
--
1.92
1.92
13.43
--
5.35
--
--
14.95
8.69
-------
Breakpoint Ignition System
Analysis of Aftermarket Selling Prices
Group 2 (Chllton) G. M. Data
Breakerless Assembly
(1972 ear data)
6 Cyl
8 Cyl
Electronic Ignition
(1977 car data)
6 Cyl 8 Cyl
Distributor Assembly
Points
Condenser
Rotor
Cap
Coil
Breaker Plate
Vacuum Control
Shaft (Included in Assy.)
Capacitor
Module
Housing
Harness
54.05
3.68
1.71
1.35
4.07
16.40
3.00
4.02
23.50
-
-
Included
_
58.30
5.60
1.71
2.31
6.55
16.40
3.29
4.02
23.50
-
-
Item 1
_
(Total Distributor) 138.75
-
-
3.65
Cap 8.63
Cover 3. 09
Coil 32.90
Pole Piece & Plate 20.70
5.85
23.50
2.67
15.70
14.90
9.80
170.50
-
-
3.90
11.65
3.09
27.80
20.70
5.85
23.50
2.67
53.10
20.25
9.80
Total
Less Shaft
111.78 121.68
23.50 23.50
d8.28 98.18
138.75 170.50
218
RATH A STRONG
INEOIIPCIATCD
-------
Breakerpoint Ignition System
COST METHODOLOGY
Tlr; weight data was obtained from Chrysler data. The cost estimates are gross; not
based on a part by part operational analysis.
The analysis of various systems—breakerpoint versus electronic—provides a top down
reference cost.
Breakerpoint Ignition System
APPLICATIONS
Using the aftermarket data, the delta difference by engine size is proportional to the
number of cylinders.
219
RATH & STRONG
INCOI'QIftTCD
-------
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
2. High Energy (Electronic) Ignition System
Th« detailed description! and cnlculationa following this page apply to passenger
car parti, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 7B - 002, March, 1978. The
costs shown therein have bean adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costi for trucks ere shown below.
Automobile EOS
Unit Costs Factor
Material 2.68 1.3
Labor and Overhead 17.45 2.7
Equipment .28 2.4
Tooling .62 3.4
Weighted EOS Factor 2.5
X Automobile Retail Price Equivalent $53.13
= Truck Retail Price Equivalent $132.83
220
RATH A STRONG
INCDIPOIUTtD
-------
High Energy Ignition
Group 2 - iilCTRONIC IGNITION - Parts
1 2
7
*^.
*-. ( . f
« M 7
[97T— «ic below
CJif w S30165 Z3.50
Sphiperf 830110 2330
1974-77 _.
Pvl n*. Pnee
. •1Q50S6B .08
1974-77— «M below ........ 1176222 2023
1877— ZSOeng. _ «1&80038 14.90
1974-77—eieb.low *1876018 9.80
1977— 230 «ng. .,
(14) Washer
1973-77.™
1874-77 .
(11)0*4»
1974-77— «£ below
«1SSOO21 0.80
•1837617 07
*1965864 .41
_-.«19SBS99 SJ3
16
197S— C*Ji(
1976— w/Sp hi per!
Ctiif.
(!) l*tain*f
1974-77
Corvcne
197S-77
(9) Pal* Pi*<* A Plat
1974-77
(10)MwJuI«
1974-77— «mc below
1977— 230 tng...-..-
1874-77
1977— 230 *nf
wa/lntcylhd
if n it ion WifM
(454 eng )
1975-76*1''''
1975-77
lgntti*n Swrfefi
1974-77— «»c below..
CHJOJ — x.
— — —
17
\ ,
J) ©iBp
18
Nrt N«L Fn»«
1^12*4 23 V)
1891716 23.50
•630446 -23
N.L. . . .
v Auy.
«18738il 2070
«1875990 S3.10
„_. »1880040 13 70
......»1876154 157
Hn us. fc^
ir«
*193JS76 J(j
•196205: SJJ
14
90
30
85
....•6908551
-------
High Energy Ignition System
Manufacturing costs
Bill of Material
J
-1
I
IxJ
u
-1
7)
0
Z
0
Part
Distrib. Asm.
Cap
Cover
Coil
Pole PC & Plastic
Vacuum Cont
Shaft
Capacitor
Module
Housing
Harness
Material
.
Plastic
Plastic
Copper
Plastic
Copper
Iron
Steel
Copper
Steel
Plastic
Copper
Copper
Plastic
Ceramic
Plastic
Copper
Weight
2.000
.200
.100
.200
.100
.200
.3000
.1000
.2000
.4000
,2000
Material
Costs
_
.1600
.0800
.1600
.0000
.1000
.1200
.5000
1.0000
.3200
.1600
Labor
Coats
.3500
.4000
.1500
2.2500
1.2500
.8500
.7500
.5000
4.0000
.7500
.5000
Labor Manufacturing
Overhead
.1400
.1600
.0600
.9000
.5000
.3400
.3000
.2000
1 .6000
,,3000
.2000
Costs Reference
.4900 Electronic test
.7200 See sketch
.2900
3.3100
.
1.B300
1.2900
1.1700
1 . 2000
6.6000
1.3700
.8600
19,1300
-------
Hi(jh Hnoryy Ignition System
Tooling Costs
Amortization Per Piece
12 Year
J
-4
i I
S a, rsj
• * ro
•» v/j
g W
•4 ~j
o ™
0
z
0
Part
Oistrib. Asaem.
Cap
Cover
Coil
Pole PC A Plate
Vacuum Cont
Shaft
Capacitor
Module
Housing
Harness
Economic
Volume
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1 Yeur
Recurring
Tooling
.0500
50,000
.0200
20,000
.0100
10,000
.0300
30,000
.0300
30,000
.0500
50,000
.0200
20,000
.0100
10,000
.0500
50,000
.0300
30,000
.0100
10,000
3 Year
Machinery
Nonrecurring and
Tooling
.0500
150,000
.0200
60,000
.0100
30,000
.0300
90,000
.0300
90,000
.0500
150,000
.0200
60,000
.0100
30,000
.0500
150,000
.0300
90,000
.0100
30,000
Equipment
.osno
600,000
.0200
240,000
.0100
120,000
.0050
60,000
.0050
60,000
.0500
600,000
.0100
120,000
.0100
120,000
.1000
1,200,000
.0300
360,000
.0100
120,000
12 Year
Launching
Costs
.0050
60,000
.0020
24,000
.0010
12,000
.0005
6,000
.0005
6,000
.0050
60,000
.0010
12,000
.0010
12,000
.0100
120, UOO
.0030
36,000
.0010
12,000
40 Year Amortization
Land and
Building Per Piece
.1550
.0620
.0310
.0655
.0655
.1550
.0510
.0310
.2100
.0930
.0310
RAD 1,500,000/year for 3 years for 1,000,000 units per year or $1.50 per piece.
Total
.9500
-------
High Energy Ignition System
Total Manufacturing Costs
*
a
a
m
'm
a
m
m
I
1
» £
(A
H
31
0
z
0
Part
Dist. Assem.
Cap
Cover
Coil
Pole PC A Plate
Vacuum Coot
Shaft
Capacitor
Module
Housing
Harness
Material
_
.1600
.0800
.1600
.0800
.1000
.1200
.5000
1 .0000
.3200
.1600
Labor
.3500
.4000
.1500
2.2500
1.250
.8500
.7500
.5000
4.0000
.7500
.5000
Plant
Overhead
.1400
.1600
.0600
1.9000
.5000
.3400
.3000
.2000
1.6000
.3000
.2000
Plant
MfQ.
Costa
.4900
.7200
.2900
4.3100
1.8300
1.2900
1.1700
1 . 2000
6.6000
1.3700
.8600
Tooling
Exp.
.1000
.0400
.0200
.0600
.0600
.1000
.0400
.0200
. 1000
.0600
.0200
Inv.
.0550
.0220
.0110
.0055
.0055
.0055
.0110
.0110
.1 100
.0330
.0110
Corp.
Alloc.
.20MC»
.0980
.1440
.0580
.6620
.3660
.2580
.2340
.2400
1.3200
.2740
.1720
Corp.
Profit
.20MC*
.0980
.1440
.0580
.6620
.3660
.2580
.2340
.2400
1.3200
.2740
.1720
Vendor
Mfg.
Costs
.8410
1.0700
.^370
5.6995
2.6275
1.9115
1.6890
1.7110
9.4500
2.0110
1.2350
20.1300
28.6825
-------
High Energy Ignition System
Retail Price Equivalent at the Vehicle Level
5 I
(fl
H
33
0
z
0
Part
Plant Tools
Vendor and
Costs R&D Equip.
K)
N>
HE ignition 28.6025
Vehicle
Corp. Corp. Dealer Retail
AHoc. Profit Markup Price
.20VC* ...20VC* .AOVC" Equivalent
5.7365 2.7365 Il./i730 53.1285
-------
High Energy Ignition System
Cost Comparison to After-market Selling Prices
The manufacturing vendor costs for the system is $ 27»6325» Using the k to 1
Discount the estimated eftermarket comparison price is $117,7628. The Chilton
price for this system can vary between $138.75 for the 6 cylinder to $170.56 for 8
cylinder engines,
High Energy Ignition System
Cost Methodology
The weig.it data and material costs are estimates. The labor costs are estimates
for a given economy of scale (1,000,000 units/year). The bill of material data was
limited to the G.M. Chilean data.
High Energy Ignition System
Applications
The applications of these costs to engines will be proportional to the number of
cylinders per engines.
226
RATH & STRONG
IHCaiPOIATCO
-------
IK - TURBOCHARGER
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE ENGINES
The detailed descriptions and calculations following this page apply to passenger
car part«. The costs shown therein have been adjusted by using factors,
described later in this report, that reflect differences in «ize and in
manufacturing volume (economy of scale) between automobiles and trucks. The
EDS used for automobiles is 350,000 per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Automobile Unit Costs
Material
Labor & O.H.
Equipment
Tooling
Weighted EOS
Factors
100HP
8.98
7.57
.94
.66
220HP
20.21
13.25
.94
.66
250HP
21.89
14.10
.94
.66
350HP
23.57
14.95
.94
.66
450HP
24.13
15.23
.94
.66
EOS
Factor
1.3
2.7
2.4
3.4
2.0
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
X Auto RPE 46.47
1.70
95.09 101.45
103.56
= Truck RPE 92.94 168.53 180.67 192.76 196.76
227
RATH & STRONQ
INCOIPOMTtll
-------
A,ft
24 — Ntw and Rtdoi^xd Turfaetkarqti V-t Eiflu*
228
RATH A STRONG
-------
Engine Coverage With AIResearch Turbocharger Models
90-
INTERMITTENT RATING BSAC 10 LB/H.P. - HR
60 | so 100
I
T04B
.3
2
c
o
\
150 I 200 300 \400 500 600 \ 700 800
I DiESEL ENGINE RATED BMP \ \
\
i —^ \ T18A
TV81
229
RATH & STRONG
-------
TheD
Technological advances resulting from aggressive development
programs have provided and are expected to continue to provide:
• Reductions in turbocharger weight relative to engine horsepower
• Reductions in turbocharger cost relative to engine horsepower
Improvements in application techniques and turbocharger configurations to permit
efficient use of a small number of models on a wide range of engine sizes
GarrBC AJRamarcp (u/bocfca/yef cost tnd might (rends
1875
Dimensions are in inches
MODEL
T04B
TV61
TV71
TV81
T18A
A
7.43
12.07
10.93
10.93
11.25
B
1.50
3.10
1.96
1.96
2.50
C
8.23
12.46
11.33
11.33
11.25
D
5.25
7.34
7.34
7.34
925
E
3.00
4.25
4.25
4.25
4.25
F
4.35
5.50
5.50
5.50
5.75
G
8.73
10.93
10.93
10.93
12.00
H
63
90
950
10.0
100
POUNDS
16
35
39
42
43
230
RATH A STRONG
INCORPORATED
-------
2 I
0
2
D
TURBOCHARGER
T03
MANUFACTURING COST
Component
Turbacharger Assem.
Turbine Wheel
Impeller
Shaft
Balancing
Bearings
Impeller Hsg.
Impeller Hsg. Gv.
Oil I/O Hsg.
Turbine Hsg.
Wastegate Vlv.
Wastegate Brkt.
Wastegate Linkage
Hardware
Hose & Fittlnq
Total
Wei ght
17.00
.70
.23
1.41
.30
3.00
,25
1.00
8.61
1.00
.10
.15
.25
.20
Material
Cr-N.SU.
Alum.
Cr-N.Stl.
52100
Alum.
Alum.
CI
CI
Steel
Steel
Steel
Steei
RubStl.
Summary
Tooling
OH & Prod.
Material
Costs
.8400
.1610
1.1280
.3900
2.10C10
.1730
.4000
3.4440
8.638
.2000
.0200
.0300
.0500
.0400
.340
8.978
Labor
Hrs.
.067
,134 1
.016
.067
.134 1
.067
.050
.0010
.0330
.083
4
.0670
.00080
.00080
.00010
.0010
5
Labor
.5025
.0050
.1200
.5025
.0050
.5025
.3750
.0075
.2475
.6225
.890
.5025
.0060
.0060
. 0075
.0075
.530
.420
Manufacturing Costs
Overhead
40%
.2010
.4020
,0480
.2010
.4020
.2010
.1500
.0003
.0990
.2490
1.953
.2010
.0002
.0002
.0003
,0003
.202
2.155
$16.55
1.79
9.93
Mfg.
Costs
.7035
2.2470
.3290
1.8315
1.4070
1.0935
2.625
.1828
.7465
4.3155
15.48.1
.9035
.0262
.0362
.0578
.0478
1.072
16.553
OEM Costs
$20.27 at $l,000,000/Year
-------
TO3 TURBOCHARGER
TOOLING
0
*
a
W
3J
-1
I
X
0
z
Turbocharger
Turbine Wheel
Impeller
Shaft
Balancing
Bearings
Impeller Hsg.
Impeller Hsg. Cov.
Oil I/O Hsg.
Turbine Hsg.
Wastegate VI v.
Wastegate Brkt.
Wastegate Linkage
Hardware
Hose & Fitting
Totals
Cost Per Unit
Economy Recurring
of" Tooling
Scale 1 Yr.
1,000,000 36.0
24.0
16.8
12.0
9.6
4.8
7.2
.7
3.6
24.0
7.2
3.6
.7
.7
1.4
151.5
.152
Nonrecurring
Tooling
3 Yrs.
360.0
240.0
168.0
120.0
96.0
48.0
72.0
7.2
36.0
240.0
72.0
36,0
7.2
7.2
14.4
1,524.0
.508
Equipment
12 Yr.
1,800.0
1,200.0
840.0
600.0
480.0
240.0
360.0
36.0
180.0
1,200.0
360.0
120.0
36.0
36.0
72.0
7,560.0
.630
Land &
Launching Buildings Amortize
12 Yr. 40 Yr. Par Piece
180.0 10,000
120.0
84.0
60.0
48.0
24.0
36.0
3.6
18.0
120.0
36.0
12.0
3.6
3.6
7.2
756.0 10,000
.063 .250 1.603
-------
TO3 TURBOCHARGER
VENDOR COST
Plant .20 .20
Plant Mfg. Tooling MC Corp Vendor
Part Matl Labor O.H. Cost Exp Inv Corp Pft Cost
Turbocharger 8.64 4.89 1.95 15.48 .60 .89 3.10 3.10 23.17
Waste Gate Valve .34 .53 .20 1.07 .06 .05 .21 .21 1.60
TOTAL 8.98 5.42 2.15 16.55 .66 .94 3.31 3,31 24.77
233
RATH A STRONG
iNCOHPORATID
-------
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
Turboeharger
Waste Gate
Vehicle Assy
Engine Mod.
Vendor
Cost
23.17
1.60
Tools &
R&D Equip
1.00
.25
.25
.20
Corp
Alloc
4.63
.32
.05
.05
.20
Corp
Profit
4.63
.32
.05
.05
.40
Dealer
M/U
9.26
.64
.10
.10
RPE
42.69
2.88
.45
.45
TOTAL RETAIL PRICE EQUIPMENT 46.47
234
RATH « STRONG
iHeORPOMATCO
-------
TURBOCHARGERS - VARIOUS SIZES
The detailed cost estimate for the TO3 Turbocharger has been shown on the
preceeding pages. To arrive at estimates for larger sizes, these principles were
followed:
Same economy of scale as the TO3 (1,OOC,000).
Material costs increased by weight.
Labor and overhead increased at 60% the rate material was
increased.
Tools, equipment, launching, land, and building unit costs unchanged.
Horsepower ratings road from chart at the 55-inch intake manifold
pressure level.
235
RATH & STRONG
INCORPORATED
-------
TURBOCHARGER5
Engine HP
Turbocharger Model
Weight (Ibs)
Material
Labor and Overhead
Plant Manufacturing Cost
Tools, Equipment, Bldgs
Corp, O.H. & Profit
Vendor Cost .
R&D
Vehicle Assy Tooling
Corp. Alloc. & Profit
Dealer M/U
100
TO3
TO4B
16
8.98
7.57
16.55
1.60
6.62
24.77
1.00
.50
10.10
10.10
220
TV61
36
20.21
13.25
33.46
1.60
13.38
48.44
1.00
.50
19.38
19.38
250
TV71
39
21.89
14.10
35.99
1.60
14.40
51.99
1.00
.50
20.80
20.80
350
TV81
42
23.57
14.95
38.52
1.60
15.41
55.53
1.00
.50
22.21
22.21
450
T18A
43
24.13
15.23
39.36
1.60
15.74
56.70
1.00
.50
22.68
22.68
Retail Price Equivalent
46.47 88.70 95.09 101.45 103.56
236
RATH & STRONG
INCORPORATED
-------
II B - UNIVERSAL FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM
HEAVY DUTY DIESEL ENGINES
The manufacturing and tooling costs estimates on the following pages have been taken
from a orevious report submitted to D.O.T, They were based on passenger car quantities.
The retail price equivalents for truck quantities (50,QQO/yr.) are given below.
Automobile Unit Costs
EOS
4-Cyl 6-Cyl 8-Cyl Factor
Material 18.88 24.36 29.96 1.3
Labor and Overhead 3.75 4.83 6.16 2.7
Equipment 2.11 2.11 2.11 2.4
Tcoling 4.26 4.26 4.26 3.4
Weighted EOS Factors 1.9 1.8 1.8
X Automobile R.P.E. 70.00 86.54 103.83
= Truck R.P.E. 133.00 155.77 186.89
237
RATH & STRONQ
INCOKPOtATZD
-------
UNIVERSAL FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM
MANUFACTURING COST
Fuel Filter (Bosch)
Low Pres. Fuel Pump
Fuel Piping
HP Nozzles - 4 Cyl
- 6 Cyl
11 - 8 Cyl
Hi Pres. Fuel Pump - 4 Cyl
1 " - 6 Cyl
" " " " - 8 Cyl
Totals
- 4 Cyl
- 6 Cyl
- 8 Cyl
Material
.35
1.75
2.10
4.88
7.32
9.76
9.80
12.84
16.00
18.88
24.36
29.96
Labor
.05
.25
.30
.68
1.02
1.36
1.40
1.84
2.40
2.68
3.46
4.36
Plant
Over-
head
.02
.10
.12
.27
.40
.54
.56
.73
.96
1.07
1.37
1.74
Mfg.
Cost
.42
2.10
2.52
5.83
8.74
11.66
11.76
15.41
19.36
22.63
29.19
36.06
238
RATH & STRONG
INCORPOIATID
-------
0
z
0
run iN.icriioN SYSTCM ifjni ING AMOIUI/ATION
Part
Fuel Filter
Low Prea Pump
Fuel Piping
Hi Pressure Nozzles
HI Pressure Purnp
EOS
!, 400, ODD
500,000
500,000
500,000
500,000
Rncurrintj
Toolimj
(1 Yr)
150
50
20
250
750
Non
recurrinq
Toolinq
(5 Yr)
350
250
50
650
1950
Machinery
Ctjuip.
(12 Yr)
1000
600
130
1600
4000
Lsjurtrh
Cost
(12 Yr)
200
100
20
300
1000
Laid
and
Ouilriing
(40 Yr)
2000
2000
300
JOOO
6000
Amort
per
System
.30
.50
.11
1.40
4.06
I
Total/System
ro
VI
2.25
2.02
1.25
.25
.60
6.37
-------
UNIVERSAL FUEl INJCCTION SYSTt'M
71
5
I
2J
0
z
0
NS
Fuel Filter
Low Pressure Pump
Fuel Piping
Hi Pressure Nozzlaa
H 11
Hi Pressure Pump
II tl M
If H
Totals
4 Cyl
& Cyi
8 Cyl
4 Cyl
6 Cyl
8 Cyl
4 Cyl
6 Cy!
8 Cyl
Mfo.
Cost
.42
2.10
2.52
S.B3
8.74
11.66
11.76
15.41
19.36
22.63
29.19
36.06
MFC/ VENDOR COST
Tooling
&!£
.19
,27
.07
.93
.93
.93
2.00
2.00
2.80
4.26
4.26
4.26
Inv
.11
.23
.04
.47
.47
.47
1.26
1.26
1.26
2.11
2.11
2.11
Corp
Cost
.08
.42
.51
1,17
1,75
2.33
2.35
3.08
3.87
4.53
5.04
7.21
Corp
Profit
.08
.42
,51
1.17
1.75
2.33
2.35
3.08
3.87
4.53
5.84
7.21
Mfq/Vendor
Cost
.88
3.44
3.65
9.57
13.«
17.72
20.52
25.63
31.16
33.06
47.24
56.85
-------
UNIVLKSAL KUCL IN.IirTIUN SYSTI M
KI:TAIL PRICI: c
Mfy/
Vendor
Cost
RAD
Corp
Alloc
Corp
Profit
Diraler
Mark-Un
ID
>
i I
n
2 *>
I 5
S S
0
z
0
4 Cyl System 38.06 1.50
6 Cyl System 47.24 1.50
B Cyl System 56.85 1.50
7.61
9.45
11.37
7.61
9.45
11.57
15.22
1H.90
22.74
70.00
86.54
103.83
-------
HE - HEAVY DUTY DIESEL ENGINE
POSITIVE CRANKCASE VENTILATION VALVE (PCV)
Tha detailed descriptions and calculations following this page apply to passenger
car parts, reprinted from a previous report EPA - 78 - 002, March, 1978. Tha
costs shown therein have bean adjusted by using factors, described later in this
report, that reflect differences in size and in manufacturing volume (economy of
scale) between automobiles and trucks. The EOS used for automobiles is 350,000
per year; for trucks, 50,000.
The resulting retail price equivalent costs for trucks are shown below.
Automobile
Unit Cost
Material $.088
Labor and Overhead .175
Equipment .096
Tooling .036
Weighted EOS Factor
X Automobile Retail Price Equivalent
= Truck Retail Price Equivalent
EOS
Factor
1.3
2.7
2.4
3.4
2.4
$1.14
$2.74
242
RATH A STRONG
-------
COST ESTIMATES
PCV Valve System
All engines produce small amounts of blowby gases, which seep past the piston
rings, and into the crankcase. These blowby gases are the result of the high
pressures developed within the combustion chamber, during the combustion
process, and contain undesirable pollutants. To prevent blowby gases from
entering the atmosphere, while allowing proper crankcase ventilation, all
engines use a PCV system .
The PCV system prevents blowby gases from escaping by routing them through
a vacuum controlled ventilating valve, and a hose, into the intake manifold. The
blowby gases mix with the air/fuel mixture and are burned in the combustion
chambers. When the engine is running, fresh air is drawn into the crankcase
through a tube or hose connected to the air cleaner housing.
The PCV valve consists of a needle valve, soring and housing. Whan
the engine is off, the spring holds the needle valve closed to stop vapors from
entering the intake manifold. When the engine is running, manifold vacuum
unseats the valve allowing crankcase vapors to enter the intake manifold. In
case of a backfire (in the intake manifold) the valve closes, stopping the backflow
and preventing ignition of fumes in the crankcase. During certain engine
conditions, more blowby gases are created than the ventilator valve can handle.
The excess is returned, through the air intake tube, into the air cleaner and
carburetor, where it is disbursed in the air/fuel mixture, and, combusted
within the engine.
243
RATH & STRONG
-------
PCV Vatvt System
»ILL Of MATERIAL
O«»crlptLon
PCV Valva
Housing
Spring
NMdlc
Pip*
Cranvn*ti
Crwnmais
(VC W AC)
Total Parti
VahJete Aa»*mbly
Valva
Pip*
Engine Modification
Total Manufacturing
•t Plant Utvcl
•UtarUl Weigh!
.•n
ClMt .95*
Spring .01
»t*«l
StMl .01*
Sta*l .200
Rubber .OJO
Hubb«r .9*4
-
.
-
-B- -0-
CotU
Mat
Co«t*
-
.911
.902
.903
.611
.9iO
.904
.901
-
-
-
-0-
Ov^P-d
.942
.9Sf
.9ia
.§21
.1*0
.•26
.MS
.•10
. m
.9CJ
.MJ
.91*
Mfg
Coati
.(Ml
.W?
.•If
.an
.ISi
.MO
.909
.*tl
.107
.126
.61*
.•03
fUforra*
•44713 S
M1344I
itniu
04UJ25
Numbers
UXOTTUX
C%\^. *'---.:-v,
\i 4 S^* ' '
f ~\ Jtr^"~'',
mnKimm r, / N^W*^^ Fwa
pn
'CSKTIQt
J^ri» t-^——' >- —f* J<
^p - ,
T)rT>ta«l PCVv&lw
^^i±±
Typlnl
244
RATH ii STRONG
IMCORPORATID
-------
PCV Valve System--Tooling Costs—Amortized Per Piece
n
-i
K> I I
Ul 0 fii
! 5
3 a
0
z
0
Valve Assembly
Housing
Amortized
Spring
Amortized
Needle
Amortized
Pipe
Amortized
Grommels
Amortized
Grommels
Amortized
Total
Vehicle Assembly
Amortized
Engine Modification
Amortized
Total — Tool ing/ Piece
Economic
Volume
Per Year
1,000,000
3.000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
4,000,000
4,000,000
300,000
300,000
1 Year
Recurring
Tooling
.050
53, 000
.002
5,000
.005
10,000
.057
.005
10,000
.004
15,000
.004
15,000
.013
.001
3,000
.002
6,000
.003
3 Year Non-
Recurring
Tooling
.017
50,000
.002
15,000
.002
12,000
.021
.001
5,000
.002
20,000
.002
20,000
.005
.001
5,000
.001
12,000
.002
12 Year
Machinery
Equipment
.020
250,000
.003
100,000
.002
50,000
.025
.001
25,000
.002
100,000
.002
100,000
.005
.0003
10,000
.0015
60,000
.0018
4 Year
Launching
Costs
.006
25,000
-
5,000
_
5,000
.006
Valve
-
2,000
-
5,000
-
5,000
_
2,000
—
5,000
-
40 Year Amortization
Land 6 Per
Buildings Piece
.093
-
.007
-
.009
.109
.007
_
.008
-
.DOS
-
.023
.0023
-
.0045
-
.1388
Research and Development by Vehicle Manufacturing: $100,000 for 2 Years.
Using a 3-year amortizing rule, the R/D per piece = $.022.
-------
PCV Valve System
TOTAL MANUFACTURING COSTS
Part
PCV Valve
Pipe
Crommets
Plant
Over-
Head
Mat Labor l.«0
.016 .100 .040
.060 .01U3 .0057
.012 .0107 .OOU
Plant
Mfg
Costs
.156
.080
.0267
Tooling
Exp.
.078
.006
.012
Inv .
.031
.001
.004
•
.20 MC
Corp
Costs
.030
.016
.006
.20 MC
Corp
Profit
.030
.016
.006
Vendo
Corp
Sellin
Price
.325
.119
.055
246
RATH & STRONG
INC9HPOHATEO
-------
PCV Valve System
RETAIL PRICE EQUIVALENT
AT THE VEHICLE LEVEL
Part
PCV Valve
Pipe
Grommets
Vehicle
Assembly
Plant
or
Vendor
Selling
Price
.325
,119
.055
.126
Engine Mod .014
Total PCV
System Retail
RED
.022
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
Invest
Tools
&
Equip
-0-
-0-
-0-
.0023
.oous
Corp
Allocation
.2QVC
.0652
.023S
,011
.013
.003
Corp
Profit
.20VC
.0652
.0238
.011
.013
.003
.40sp
Dealer
Markup
.1304
.0576
.022
.026
.006
Price Equivalent
Vehicle
Retail
Price
Equivalent
.608
.22«
,099
. 180
.031
1 . 142
o
247
RATH A STRONS
1NC8MGRATCO
-------
PCV Valve System
Cost Comparison to After-market Selling Prices
Using the after-market discount data in the references, we can conclude that
the vendor selling price is about 1/1 to 1/5 of the aftermarket selling price.
This rule is applicable if the part requires a minimum of packaging and
handling costs, in relation to the value of the part an d i f the product! on
volumas ar^ v/itiiin close agreement.
Using the following aftermarket prices for the PCV valve:
Chilton Sears
3.12 1.76
Vendor Cost 1/4 .78 . W
Vendor Cost 1/5 .62 .35
The estimated vendor cost is $. 326 for the PCV valve. This Chilton price
is the cost to the customer at the service station.
248
RATH & STRONG
INCORPORATED
-------
PCV Valve System
Cost Methodology
The weight data for the components was obtained from fin Oldsmobilc parts
computer document. The material costs are computed by using the 1977
mill prices, obtained from Metalworking News' metals market data. The
labor costs are estimates of production, using today's technology, with a
relatively high level of automation. The overhead and corporate cost data
was obtained from a U.S.A. company.
The tooling costs are estimates of expendable tooling, i.e., jigs, fixtures,
molds, or dies; and machinery or equipment, launching costs, to put the
product into production at the plant level.
Judgment was used in assessing whether land or building investments were
required to put this product into production and it was concluded that
they were not.
The engine was modified to accept the valve and the piping, so, these costs
are considered as part of the total cost.
The vehicle assembly required the addition of labor to install the valve and
the piping.
Applications of PCV Valve systams to vehicle and engine configurations,
regarding 1. 6, and 8 cylinder models, was assumed to be equivalent.
249
RATH A STRONG
-------
IIG - PARTICULATE TRAP - HEAVY DUTY DIESEL ENGINE
Retail Price Equivalents for Various Filter Materials and Volumes
Filter Volume (Cu. In.)
Filter
Price
Per Lb.
(Base)
1133
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
2200
2400
(Base)
$15
$ 5
$1U
$20
$25
$30
$35
$116.89
78
97
136
156
175
194
$89
50
70
108
128
147
167
$103
64
84
122
142
161
181
$119
80
100
138
158
177
197
$134
95
115
153
173
192
212
$149
110
130
168
188
207
227
$164
125
145
183
203
222
242
$179
140
160
198
218
237
257
$194
155
175
213
233
252
272
$209
170
190
228
248
267
287
250
RATH & STRONG
INCORPORATED
-------
P ARTICULATE TRAP-AIR MAZE (HC - 127)
Included are:
a. Pictorial illustration
b. Bill of Materials and Manufacturing Cost Estimates for an 1133
in. trap
c. Estimates of other costs and profits to achieve the Vehicle Retail
Price Equivalent (same page as b, above)
d. Detail of estimates of investments for tooling and equipment
e. Derivation of formulae for size extrapolations
Two formulae are pertinent:
I. Manufacturing Cost (MC) for another size trap = $5.08 + (33.89) F where
F = new volume>-1133
II, Retail Price Equivalent = (2.52) MC + $15.48
For ready reference, a table of retail price equivalents for a range of sizes
and prices of filter materials is presented.
251
RATH A STRONG
-------
-HOUSTON CHtMlCftL COM»Nt-
W,,H
HC-127
(HCC-127J
4 we CUI.KM
-------
PARTICIPATE TRAPS - AIR MAZE, HC - 127
Derivation Of Formula For Size Variation By Adjusting Length Only
Structural Parts
The basic costed unit has 1133 in. filter chamber volume. This chamber is
cylindrically shaped*
42" Long x 5.86 Diameter = 1133 in.
Assume that any increases or decreases in this volume will be made by changing
the length of the cylinder (Diameter unchanged)
Then the only structural components changed will be: (a) Outer cylinder and (b)
Perforated metal cylinder.
Referring to the Manufacturing Cost Estimate:
Structural
Components Mfg. Cost Length
Outer Cyl. $ 9.77 48"
Perf. Metal Cyl. 2.73 42"
Sub Total $12.50 (=76%)
Other 3.90
Total $16.40
If we shorten the Perforated Metal Cylinder by Z%, the filter chamber volume
is reduced Z%.
Simultaneously, this shortens the Outer Cylinder by 42/48 X Z%, or 0.875 X Z%.
253
RATH & STRONG
INCORPONAttD
-------
The net effect on Manufacturing Cost of Structural Components caused by a
reduction (or an increase) of Z% in filter chamber volume will be:
$ M.C. = ]j375 ($9.77) + $2.73] (Z%)
$ M. C. s $11.28 (Z%)
3
This amount, related to the M. C. of the 1133 in unit, can be stated as a
proportional change in the total M. C.
% change in M, C, of structural components = 11.28/16.40 Z% - .69 Z%
The manufacturing cost of structural components resulting from changing the
filter volume by a factor F can therefore be calculated by this equation:
Total Mfg. Cost = 16,40 (j + .69 (F - lT|
Total Mfg. Cost = 16.40 (.31 + .69F)
Total Mfg. Cost = 5.08 + 11.32 F
Where F = New volume-i-1133
Example;
What is the estimated total manufacturing cost of a particulate trap having an
800 in. filter chamber?
Relative change in vol. = 800/1133 = .706 = F
Put F into the structural components equation:
New mfg. cost of structural components = 5.08 + 11.32 (.706) = $13.07
254
RATH & STRONG
INCOIPOIAtlD
-------
add proportional cost for filter
22.57 x .706 =
Total Mfg. Cost
15.93
$29.00
Derivation
Atrmaze Particulate Trap. (HC - 127) Converting Manufacturing Cost (MC)
To Vehicle Retail Price Equivalent (RPE)
a. MC of unit t
b. + MC of Vehicle Ass'n. and Body Mod.
c. + Tooling
d. + O. H.
e. + Profit
f. -t- R & D
g. + T & E
h. -f Corp. AIloc
j. + Corp. Profit
k. + Dealer M'/U
= RPE
Combining:
RPE = MC + .36 + 6.47 + .4 (MC +
Computation
(formula)
$ .36
6.57
.20 (a + b)
.20 (a + b)
2.00
.93
.20 (a+b+c+d+e)
.20 (a*b+e+d+e)
.40 (s+b+c+d+e)
= T
.362J (1.
8) + 2.93
RPE = 2.52 MC + 15.48 255
RATH & STRONG
IWCOBPOKATID
-------
V/l
PARTICULATE TRAP - AIR MAZE HC-127
(1133 cu. in, filter chamber)
COSTS PER UNIT
Port
Col.*
Derive
Structural Elements
Outer Cylinder
Outer End (2)
Inlet Pipe
Outlet Pipe
Inlet Shroud
Out 1st Shroud Cyl.
Outlet Shroud Cap
Dot
Outlet Shroud Cap
Shoulder
Perf. Metal Cyl.
End Sealant
Component!
Assembly
Otter • Accordion
TOTAL
Vehicle Assembly
Body Modification
Mot'l.
1
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
Ceramic
F/GLS
Fin,
Wgt,
(Lbs.)
2
17.7
1.2
0.6
l.t
1.3
1.3
0.3
0.2
2.2
0.2
25.9
1.5
27.Q
Mat!.
*
3
$9.56
.65
.32
A
.59
.70
.70
.16
,11
2.38
.10
15.27
-
22.50
37.77
— •
Mfg.
Labor
4
$.15
.03
.OB
.08
.08
.08
.03
.03
.25
.01
.82
.80
.05
1.67
.13
.13
Coat
O.H.
5
$.06
.01
.03
.03
.03
.03
.01
.01
.10
-
.31
.32
.02
.65
.05
.05
Tooling
Tot. Exp. Inv, Tot.
6789
(3*4*5) (7+8)
$9.77
.69
.43
.70
.81
.81
,20
.15
2.73
.11
16.40 3.36 .44 3.80
1.12 .60 .19 .79
22.57 .60 .18 .78
40.09 4.56 .81 5.37
.18 .£0 .23 .83
.18 .33 .04 .37
Corporate Plant/ Vehicle
O.H. Profit Vendor Corp. Corp. Dealer Price
(.20 (.20 Cost Tool* Alloc Profit Marie -Up Equl-
Mfg. Mfg. RAD Equip (.2 Vend (.2 Vend)(,4 Vend vaiant
Cost) Cost) Cost) Cost) Coit)
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
(6+9+10*11) (12+U3-
3.28 3.28 26.76 2.00 5.35 5.35 10.70 50.16
.23 .23 2.37 .47 .47 .92 4.23
4.51 4.51 32.37 6.47 6.47 12.95 51.26
8.02 B.02 61.50 2.00 12.29 12.29 24.57 112.65
.04 .04 1.09 .85 .22 .22 .44 2.82
.04 .04 .63 ,OG .13 .13 .25 1.22
GRAND TOTAL
37.77 1.93 .75 60.45 5,49 1.08 6.57
B.1Q B.10 63.22
2.00 .93 12.64
12.64
25.26 116.69
-------
AIR - MAZE PARTICULATE TRAP HC - 127 - TOOLING COST AMORTIZATION PER PIECE
(1133 cu. in. filter chamber)
(Volume And $ Yearly
Expressed in 100's) Volume
Structural Elements
Outer Cylinder 50
Outer Cyl. End (2) 100
Inlet Pipe 50
Outlet Pipe 50
Inlet Shroud Cyl. 50
Outlet Shroud Cyl. 50
Outlet Cap - Body 50
Outlet Cap-Shoulder 50
Perf. Metal Cyl. 50
End Sealant 50
Assembly 50
SUB TOTAL
Filter Elements
Accordion Tube 50
SUB TOTAL
Vehicle Assembly 50
Body Modification 50
GRAND TOTAL
1 Year
Recurring
Tooling
.30
15
.05
5
.10
5
.10
5
.20
10
.20
10
.10
5
.10
5
.30
15
.30
15
.30
15
2.05
105
.30
15
.30
15
.30
15
.30
15
2.95
150
3 Year
Nan-
Recurring
Tooling
.30
45
.03
10
.10
15
.10
15
.17
25
.17
25
.07
10
.07
10
.30
45
.30
45
.30
45
1.91
290
.30
45
.30
45
.30
45
.03
5
2.54
385
12 Year
Machinery
And
Equipment
.08
50
.01
10
.03
15
.03
15
.04
25
.04
25
.02
10
.02
10
.08
50
.03
15
.08
50
.,46
275
.17
100
.17
100
.21
125
.03
15
.87
515
40 Year
12 Year Land
Launching and
Cost Building
.07
5
«
1
.01
1
_
1
.01
2
«.
2
.01
1
_
1
.01
5
.01
Q
./
.01 .10
5 200
.07 .10
29 200
.01
5
.01
5
.02
15
.01
2
.11 .10
51 200
Amorti-
zation
Per
Piece
.69
115
.09
26
.24
36
.23
36
.42
62
.41
62
.20
26
.19
26
.69
115
.64
80
.79
315
4.59
1899
.78
165
.78
165
.83
200
.37
37
6.57
1301
-------
APPENDIX
METHODOLOGY
COST DERIVATION
RATH & STRONG
-------
DEVELOPMENT OF USEFULLY ACCURATE
METHODOLOGIES FOR ESTIMATING MANUFACTURING
COSTS OF AUTOMOTIVE COMPONENTS
General Discussion
It must be recognized as a reality that the manufacturing cost of a component
can never be pinpointed.
Vendor qualifications (quality, delivery performance, second-source
considerations) contribute to variation in the cost of the component. Internal
operations also contribute to the variation (method change:., scrap rates.
tolerance adjustments).
The point being made is that any estimate of a component's cost is subject Lo
some error.
The question then becomes, "How big an error is allowable?" ("Can I t
be accepted?")
COST VERSUS WEIGHT METHODOLOGY
Logic dictates that, all things being equal, the manufacturing costs of parts of a
given material should bear some rational relationship to their weights; there is
more material in the heavier piece; its very weight or size should tend to slow
down the rate at which it can be processed.
Of course all things are not equal. One piece is more complex than another,
requiring additional operations, thereby pushing up its cost. And this means that
although, in aggregate, a good correlation between weight and cost does exist,
the estimated cost of a single item based on its weight alone is subject to a
measurable degree of probable inaccuracy.
To clarify a bit the laws of inaccuracy (generally called laws of probability)
consider the following synthetic example:
RATH A STRONG
INCOIPOftATtO
-------
Suppose a formula says that 95% of the one-pound pieces cost $1,00 plus or minus
$.20.
1. This means that were you to select one piece, weigh "»t, find that it
weighed one pound and so cost it at $1.00, you could be incorrect by
$.20.
2. The very same formula inherently implies that were 25 different one-
pound pieces priced, the total would be in error by only plus or minus
$1.00, since some would err on the high side and others on the low.
3, The average per-piece error decreases by the square root of the number
of pieces averaged.
WEIGHT-COST CORRELATION FORMULAE
The Manufacturing Costs used in the data base are, for the most part, derived
from mathematical equations that relate the weight of a piece to its
Manufacturing Cost. The equations are all linear and of the familiar slope-and-
intercept form y = ax + b.
The equations, the development of which is described in subsequent text, are
given in Exhibit 1.
RATH A STRONG
-------
r ORMULAE FOR ESTIMATING THE HANI FACTORING COST
a
S w
•* *
EP "*
0
z
0
Material
Stamped Steel
Stamped Steel
Stamped Steel
Steel Wire
Aluminum
Plastic
Plastic
Die Cast Zinc
Rubber
Of A PART WHCN ITS WEIGHT
Formula Modifiers
Simple Paris: up to 4 Ibs.*
Medium Parts: up to 4 Ibs.*
Complex: up to it Ibs,"
Light: up to 0. 1 Ibs.
Heavy: over 0.1 Ibs.
Sneering estimates should be made.
IS KNOWN
$
Wgt x
Lbs
(W x
(W x
(W x
(W x
(W x
(W x
(W x
(W x
(W x
Cost Equals
Slope
Factor
(a)
$ .235) +
*.30 } +
.367) +
.439} 4
.238) +
2.03 ) +
.438) +
1.19 ) +
1.109) +
Intercept
(b)
$.030
.080
,13
.034
.461
.013
.102
AM
.014
m
X
5"
-------
DEVELOPMENT OF THE WEIGHT-COST CORRELATION FORMULAE
/•»»
Data Sources
Three separate sets of cost estimations, each from a different source, were used
in arriving at the equations presented. On all three, the cost of a part was
established by the universally-used industrial engineering techniques an
experienced machine tool engineer, having a wide background knowledge of
processing methods and rates end having information on the dimensions and
configuration of a given piece, can predict its cost within close limits.
The three sources:
A. Pioneer Engineering and Manufacturing Corporation report, February
1976; Report No. DOT-HS-5-01081.
8. Budd Minicar study (DOT/HTSA),
C. Rath 4 Strong report (DOT/TSC 1067).
Computation Procedures - General
Each set of data was analyzed separately. The three analyses were compared
and found to be in good agreement, with some isolated instances of parts not
fitting the overall weight-cost correlation pattern. These relatively few
significant deviations were individually examined and virtually all were rationally
explained. (Main causes were (1) erroneous classification of assemblies as parts
and (2) heavier steel parts, over 5 pounds, do not exhibit a close enough
relationship between weight and cost.)
The three analyses were then amalgamated into one best solution, resulting in
the formulae presented previously in Exhibit 1.
fl-lt-
RATH A STRONG
INCQIPOMTIO
-------
COMPUTATION PROCEDURE - SPECIFIC EXAMPLES
Example 1 - Stamped Steel - Pioneer Data
(As described in the referenced Pioneer report, a 1975 Chevelie Coupe was
completely dismantled and 3 detailed analysis made of each component; weights
were recorded and manufacturing costs were estimated, using "procedures and
techniques adapted from the automotive industry;" with 350,000 units per year
and September 1, 1975 labor rates and material cost as a base.)
The weight and cost figures given were first graphed into a scatter plot.
Visual analysis of the plotted points indicated that while a weight-cost
correlation clearly existed, the points were not normally distributed about any
"best-fit" central line. In other words, two families of parts existed--3 so-called
bimodal distribution of "simple" and "complex" parts.
Exhibit 2, which covers the weight range from 0 to 1.5 pounds, most clearly
demonstrates this bimodal characterised. The same distinctness of families
pertains up to 4 pounds; beyond this weight the correlation of weight and cost
becomes too weak to be usaful.
Two linear regression lines are required; one for the "simple" family ana one for
the "complex," as shown in Exhibit 3.
Exhibit 4 displays the 0-3.99 pounds raw jata from the Pioneer report and also
the part-by-part comparison with then- ar.d the values derived from the best fit
lines. As can be seen, 52 parts are involved which, on a one-each basis, are
estimated to cost $14.33, against which the weight-cost correlation equations
give an estimate of $14.60; a difference in total of only $.27 and the largest
single part error is $.13.
H * STRONG
INCOKfOIATEO
-------
NO. ***, «• •i¥i»iOH«.
O\
-------
Exhibit 4
STAMPED STEEL—COMPARISON OF PIONEER ESTIMATES
AND WEIGHT-COST EQUATIONS VALUES (0-3.
Pioneer
Data
(Ranked
by Wgt)
Lbs. $
.03
.04
.06
.09
.09
.10
.11
.12
.13
.13
.16
,16
.20
.25
.25
.23
.31
.32
.34
.50
.60
.62
.94
.97
1.13
1.21
1.88
1.97
2.16
2.38
$.06
.03
.02
.04
.04
.07
.10
.07
.07
.09
.08
.08
.08
.12
.11
.07
.09
.10
.13
.16
.13
.19
.29
.20
.27
.34
.45
.55
.46
.64
Weight-Cost
Class* Equation
of Diff.
Part $ (Over)
S
s
S
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
5
s
5
s
s
s
s
$.04
.04
.04
.05
.05
.05
.06
.06
.06
.06
.07
.07
.08
.09
.09
.10
.10
.10
.11
.15
.17
.17
.25
.26
.29
.31
.47
.49
.53
.58
$-.02
.01
.02
.01
.01
-.02
-.04
-.01
-.01
-.03
-.01
-.01
-
-.03
-.02
.03'
.01
-
-.02
-.01
.04
-.02
-.04
.05
.02
-.03
.02
-.06
.07
-.06
99 POUNDS)
Pioneer
Data
(Ranked Class'
by Wgt) of
Lbs. $ Part
2.81
2.31
$ .55
.55
S
S
Weight-Cost
Equation
Diff.
$ (Over)
$ .68
.68
$ .13
.13
Subtotal
.06
.09
.09
.13
.16
.22
.25
.38
.41
.44
.63
.64
.64
.72
.81
.94
1.75
1.91
2.25
2.93
$6.23
.15
.14
.15
.15
.16
.22
.25
.25
.26
.34
.30
.38
.32
.39
.35
.48
.91
.82
.89
1.19
s
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
$6.35
.15
.16
.16
.13
.19
.21
.22
,27
.28
.29
.36
.36
.36
.39
.43
.47
.77
.83
.96
1.21
$ .12
-
.02
.01
.03
.03
-.01
-.03
.02
.02
-.05
.06
-.02
.04
-
.08
-.01
-.14
.01
.07
.02
Subtotal
$8.10
c
$8.25
$ .15
Grand Total
$14.33
$14.60
$ .27
'Simple = S
Complex = C
r
-------
Example 2 - Plastic
The data on plastic parts given in the Pioneer report was analyzed in a manner
similar to that described in Example I.
Here, the scatter-piotted points, Exhibit 5, showed a clear delineation between
the lighter (up to 0.1 pounds) and the heavier parts. Two bent-fit lines describe
closely the relations between weight and estimated cost.
Exhibit 6 presents the raw data and the comparable mathematically-generated
values. On a one-each basts, both methods give a total of $3.69 for the 19 pieces
involved, and the greatest individual deviation is $.07.
A-B
.RATH A STRONG
IMCD«»0«AftD
-------
Nf - (Ui*taic*fNtc*.nii'ti.lk*-> 4O 11>2
** ** * 11 * M »•••* *» *• «
Reproduced from
besl available copy.
-------
Exhibit 6
PLASTIC-COMPARISON OF PIONEER ESTIMATES
AND WEIGHT-COST EQUATIONS VALUES
Pioneer
Data
Lbs.
.005
,005
.01
.01
.01
.03
.06
.08
.09
.09
.10
.19
.32
.34
.44
.47
.57.
.75
.88
$
$ .005
.05
.005
.01
.05
.10
.15
.17
.20
.20
.20
$1.14
.15
.30
.25
.30
.30
.30
.50
.45
S2.55
$3.69
Weight
Class
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
L ight
Light
Light
Light
Liqht
Subtotal
Liqht
Heavy
Heavy
Heavy
Heavy
Heavy
Heavy
Heavy
Heavy
fub total
Heavy
Grand Total
Weight-Cost
Equation
$
$ .02
.02
.03
.03
.03
.07
.14
.18
.20
,20
.22
$1.14
.19
.24
.25
.29
.31
.35
.43
.49
$2.55
$3.69
$ Diff.
(Over)
$ .015
-.03
.025
.02
-.02
-.03
-.01
.01
-
-
.02
-
.04
-.06
-
-.01
.01
.05
-.07
.04
-
-
/Mo
RATH & STRONG
INCOHPOtATCD
-------
Reproduced from
best available copy. ^^
-------
Budd Company
Report 0323-1
(DGT-HS-S-01215)
RESEARCH SAFETY VEHICLE PRODUCIBIUTV AND
COST STUDY FOR MINICARS, INC.—November 5, 1976
Volume Basis - 300,000 Units/Year
All Costs in 1975 Dollars
Costing Data Developed from 1975 Pinto.
1975 Pinto Cost Data:
Variable Cost
$1i7«.i9 (81.3%)
Fixed Cost
$3SS.17 (18.7%)
Tooling Cost
$62.58
Other Cost 6 Profit
$232.$8 (10.46%)
(17.58%)
ft-12
RATH A STRONG
-------
Budd Company (Continued)
Baseline data generated by Pioneer Engineering and Manufacturing Corporation,
DOT-HS-5-Q1153.
Each part of the Minicar reviewed ss to number of operations to form it and the
tooling costs—then compared to similar Pinto parts and comparative costs
established.
In-depth sludy of Pinto data made to accommodate manufacturing sequence differences
between Pinto and Minicar,
RATH & STRONG
IHCD«FO«»TID
-------
FORMULAE FOR BUDD DATA
- $/Pc = $.10+ ($.25) WCT
CA. CRS - $/Pc = $.20 * ($.29) WCT
FORMULAE FOR PIONEER DATA
STAMPED STEEL
y = .07 + .32 x
y = ,75 + Ox
y = .14 •*• .22 x
Final Revision: —
0 - 2# y - -08 + .33 x
2*#- 10# y = -30 + .22 x
/M4
RATH & STRONG
IHCOi»0»ATCB
-------
Reproduced from
best available copy.
-------
PIONEER ENGINEERING S MANUFACTURING CORPORATION
February 1376
DOT-HS-5-01081
(Note: This one, based on Intermedlate; Type Car, Is not the same one referred
to by Budd, which spoke of • 1975 Pinto.)
1975 Chevelle Coupe
Car dismantled, detailed analysis of components made; weights recorded; manufacturing
costs estimated,
"Cost estimating procedures and techniques adapted from the automotive industry."
(Gives bibliography of other studies using same estimating practices.)
Final Assembly Labor = 24 Hours
Volume - 3 50,000 Units/Year
September 1, 1975 Labor Rates and Materials Costs
ft-U
RATM & STRONG
-------
Graphical analysis of the "Stamped Steel" data in the Pioneer report DOT-HS-5-Q1081
leads to these observations and conclusions:
1. A simple linear regression, ("best fit") line relating piece cost and
piece weight is not a practical model.
2. The data are not scattered about this central line in a normal distribution
pattern. Rather, they form a Bi- or Multi-Modal distribution.
3. This Multi-Modal character of the data is a natural reflection of the various
complexities of the pieces (complexity here implies number and types of
operations as well as skeleton scrap at blanking and piercing.
1. Three levels of complexity classification are recommended:
(a) Simple
$/Pc = $.03 * ($.233 x Ibs.)
(b) Mediui?
$/Pc = $.08* ($.30 x Ibs.)
(c) Complex
$/Pc = $.13 * ($.3$7x Ibs.)
/I'll
RATM A STRONG
-------
Reproduced from M"
best available copy.
---- -;
jPT,.?;|.; ;l; • -!-.'f ;•
-------
i
M
Ill
a
E
t
ill
4
[L
1
4UJ
I*.
1
i
H
i
1
ill!
W
m
I
jlUlil!! i
iluJili-r
^
T ••
..J
ft
IH
ill
ill
ill
U
M
M
;
,1.
in,
til;
I'M
Ul'I
ur
1
Hi
h
li
1
1
i
!if,
*
M
'
.
I
fis
ii!
UL
-------
-------
x,aV
at.
••o
'*»
*
&
I
I11
r"
i
t
if
W
If
tt
nt
ffl
-------
-------
ECONOMY OF SCALE EFFECT ON COSTS
To a large degree, this report is an extenion of an earlier one (EPA-460/2-78-002)
which dealt with emission controls for automobiles rather than trucks. Some of
the devices are identical for autos and trucks. Some are similar, but larger for
trucks.
The size differential has been reflected in the unit cost estimations on a piece-
by-piece basis, so that were size the only factor, the cost data herein would be a
relatively straightforward extrapolation of the automobile estimates.
Another factor, however, intrudes: that of volume. Automobile manufacturing
quantities are several times as great as truck quantities. This affects the
manner in which a product is most economically manufactured, the larger
quantities employing more automated equipment and less manual work plus some
reduction in raw material costs. Overall, the unit cost is less for the high volume
product.
Based on separate studies, the following learning curve type relationships have
been developed and have been used in this report, where appropriate, to extend
the automotive costs to cover trucks.
RATH & STRONG
-------
For Each Doubling of Capacity,
Multiply by;
Equipment
Tooling
Labor
Material
TOTAL
Investment
1.45
1.30
Coat/Unit
0.73
0.65
0.70
0.90
0.80
A- 24
RATH A STRONG
-------
DESCRIPTION OF USE OF THE FACTORS
Typical Annual Auto Capacity 350,000
Typical Annual Basic Truck Capacity 50,000
Q .. 350,000 ,
Ratto= _5_x__ a 7
A multiple of 7 is equivalent to 2.81 doublings.
Derivation: 2" = 7
x log 2 = log 7
log7 , g,
X = ,' ** » 3 £ . Ol
log 2
22'81 * 7
Example
Suppose the equipment investment to make 350,000 per year of a given part is
$10,000,000. Unit cost (12 year write-off) is therefore $10,000,000 -8- (12 x
350,000)= $2.38.
Were this identical part to be made at a rate of only 50,000 per year, the
resultant costs would be:
Investment - $10,000,000 •*- (1.45) 2'81 = $3,520,000
Cost/Unit - $2.38 -i- (.73) 2'81 = $5.76
RATH A STRONG
INCOHPOIMITtQ
-------
INFLATION EFFECT ON COSTS
All coats shown in this report are quoted in 1977 dollars. This has been done to
maintain continuity and consistency with the similar report, (EPA-460/3-78-002)
made on automobiles in 1977.
In order to convert the quoted costs to any current year basis, some inflation
rate must be selected, and the following equation used:
C = Q (1 + R)N
Where,
C = Current Year Cost
Q = Cost Quoted in this Report
R = Selected Average Annual Inflation Rate
N s Number of Years since 1977
/>• 26
RATH A STRONQ
IMCOHKJ1ATIO
-------
TABLE OF TYPICAL MULTIPLYING FACTORS (1+R)N
Average Inflation Rate (R)
Number of 2-
Years 3-
(N5 4-
5-
6-
2%
1.04
1.06
1.08
1.10
1.13
4%
1.08
1.12
1.17
1.22
1.27
6%
1.12
1.19
1.26
1.34
1.42
8%
1,17
1.26
1.36
1,47
1.59
10%
1.21
1,33
1.46
1.61
1.77
12%
1,25
1.40
1.57
1.76
1.97
DERIVATION OF THE ECONOMY
OF SCALE, EFFECTS ON COST
For Each Doubling of Capacity,
Summary Multiply by these Factors
Investment Cost/Unit
Equipment 1,45 0.73
Tooling 1.30 0.65
Labor - 0.70
Materials - 0.90
TOTAL - 0.80
RATH A STRONG
fNEOiPOIATtD
-------
DATA RECAP
5,000/YR 50,000/YR ISO, OOP/YR
Equip. $/Unil
$156.99 $58.26
$34.59
Equip. Investment(12-Yr) $9,419,400 $34,956,000 $62,262,000
Tooling $/Unit
$424.51 $82.74
$46.12
Tooling Investment 3-Yr) $6,367,650 $12,411,0,10 $20,754,000
Labor $/Unit
$2,221.68 $1,110.48 $497.68
Material $/Unit
$1,927.23 $1,349.08 $1,156.33
Total $/Unit
$5,619.07 $3,044.75 $1,933.79
Qty. Ratios Doublings (N)
150,000
5,000
=30 2n = 30 n = 4.91
50,000
5,000
150,000
50,000
=10 2n = 10 n = 3.71
2 = 3 n = 1.58
RATH a STRONG
IMCaiPOIATtD
-------
EQUIPMENT
Qty.
Ratio
Invest.
Ratio
Use
30
10
6.61
3.71
F*'91 = 6.61
F3-71 - 3.71
F= 1.47
F= 1,48
1.45
1.78
F1'58 = 1.78
F= 1.44
Qty.
Ratio
Invest.
Ratio
Qty.
Ratio
Invest.
Ratio
Unit Cost —- = .73
TOOLING
30
10
3.26
1.95
1.67
F4'91 = 3.26
F3*71 = 1.95
F1-58 = 1.67
F= 1.27
F= 1.22
F= 1.38
1.30
Unit Cost = -65
LABOR
30
10
3
.22
.50
.45
F4'91 = .22
F3*32 = .50
F1'58 = .45
F= .73
F= .81
F= .60
.70
//• 29
RATH & STRONG
INCOHPOHATCO
-------
MATERIAL
Qty.
Ratio
30
10
S/Unit
_R.atlq
.60
.70
.86
F4'91 = .60
F3'32 . .70
F1'58 = .86
Fa .90
Fa .91
F= .91
Use
.90
TOTAL
Qty.
Ratio
30
10
3
$/Unit
Ratio
.35
.54
.64
F4'91 = .35
F3'32 = .54
F-U5B = .64
F= .81
Fs .83
F= .75
.80
/)-30
RATH A STRONG
-------
INTRODUCTORY SUMMARY TO COVER ITEMS 10-16
CATALYTIC CONVERTERS—GENERAL
There are seven types of catalytic «mv«rters to be considered.
Categorized by function, they fall into four classes: 3-way, oxidation, reduction,
and start. Categorized by physical configuration, there are only two classes:
in-line cylindrical and under-floor pan.
Configuration Class
In-Une Under-FIoor
Catalyst Function Class Cylindrical Pan
Monolithic 3-Way X
Monolithic Oxidation X
Monolithic Reduction X
Monolithic Start X
Pelleted Oxidation X
Pelleted Reduction X
Metallic Reduction X
For purposes of cost estimating, the configuration classification is by far the more
applicable, and has been used in the methodology underlying the sections following.
The first section, "Monolithic 3-Way Catalysts," presents In detailed fashion the
step-by-step logic employed in the estimations. Subsequent sections refer to this
logic where applicable, and expand only on pertinent details.
In each case, an equation is provided by which, when the catalytic content and
the volume are specified, the estimated plant manufacturing cost and retail
price equivalent can be calculated. These equations are embodied in forms A,
B, and C.
XJ-31
RATH A STRONG
IMCO1PQIATCO
-------
CALCULATION OF THE COST PER CRAM OF CATALYTIC COMPOUNDS
Conversion Factors - Weight
The material prices are typically quoted in varying units of weight.
Herewith is a list ? f ,'ac'ors by which to convert each to grams.
Avoirdupois pounds x «53.592*» = grams
Avoirdupois ounces x 28.3195 = grams
Troy pounds x 373. 2«8 = grams
Trey ounces x 31.10^ = grams
Conversion Factors - Volume
Cubic feet x 1728 = cubic inches
Square feet x 1^1 = square inches
Cost Per Cram of a Composition of Materials - (Exact Method)
To calculate the com pour-' cost in dollars per gram, use the following
format:
Material
A-1
A-2
A-3
Quoted
Price
$
B
Unit
C
Conversion Pro- Compound
to S/CrajTj,. ^ Portion
Conv . in
Factor $/Gram Compound $/Gram
D
H
Etc.
Total Compound
C
1.000
A-1, A-2, Etc. - List .ngrediints
B £ C - Quoted $ and units in which quoted
D - Appropriate conversion factor from 1. 1
E - Divid* B by D
F - List proportion as decimals (10% = 0.10}
G - Sum of colunn F iTiujst equal 1.300
H - Multiply F i*y E
J - Sum of column H equals compound cost per gram
/)• 32
RATH A STRONG
INCO»PO«ATIO
-------
Example 1
What is the cost per gram of a compound which contains 2% rhemium;
0.4% ruthenium; 31 nickel; and in which the platinum-to-rhodium ratio
is 25:1?
Solution - Rhenium = .020
Ruthenium = ,00*4
Nickel = .030
Subtotal = ,054
Remainder = 1.000-.054 = .9*46
Platinum 25*1 x .946 = .910
1
25+1 x .946 = .016
Total 1 .000
Quoted Conversion
Price to $/Cram Pro- Compound
Material $ Unit Factor $/Cram Portion $/Cram
Platinum 167.00 T. oz 31.101 5.363 .910 4.886
Rhodium H55.00 T. oz. 31.104 14.628 .036 .527
Rhenium 775.00 Av. Ib. 413.5924 1,709 .020 .034
Nickel 2.23 Av. Ib. 453.5924 .COS .030
Total Compound 1 . 000 5.^7
Cost per Cram of a Composition of Substrate Materials - (Approximation
Method)
This short-cut method, within the proportion limits proscribed, will
deviate no more than 2% from the exact method described above.
Procedure
I. Calculate the cost per gram as if platinum and rhodium were the
only ingredients (Pt + Rh = 100%) .
2. Multiply thi$ by the proportion represented by the sum of
platinum and rhodium.
3. Add to this the product of the remaining proportion times $.67.
RATH A STRONG
INCOItO»*TIB
-------
Example 2
What is the cost per gram of a compound which contains 2% rhenium; 0.1%
ruthenium; 3% nickel; and in which the platirium-to-rhodium ratio is 2S: 1?
1. Platinum 25 parts x $5.369 = $134.225
Rhodium _[ part x 14.628 = 14.628
Totals 26 parts $148.853
148.853
Cost/gram of mix 26 = $5.725
2. Platinum 91.0
Rhodium Jj .6%
Sum 94,6%
.946 x $5.725 = $5.416
3. (1.000 - .946) x $-67 = $.036
4. $5.416 * $.036 = $5.^52 (answer)
(Compare with $5.447gotten by Exact Method, Example 1,
Section 1.3.2.)
Discus 5 Jon - The short-cut method is made feasible, because of two
factors:
(a) Platinum and rhodium constitute 84.5% or more of the mixture,
and
(b) The unit price of these is much greater than of the other con-
stituents.
Typical Extreme Calculation
Platinum to Rhodium = 2:1 (upper cost ratio)
Platinum £ Rhodium = 84.5% (lower limit)
Rhenium = 5.0% (upper limit)
Ruthenium = 0.5% (upper limit]
Nickel = 10.0% (upper limit)
100.0%
Platinum
Rhodium
Rhenium
Ruthenium
Nickel
$5.369 x 2/3 x
14.628 x 1/3 x
1.709 x .050
2.009 x .005
.005 x .100
"7 *.
.845
.845
Subtotal
= $3.025
= 4. 120
$7.145
= .085
= .010
= .001
$7.241
RATH « STRONG
-------
CRAMS OF COMPOUND REQUIRED FOR VARIOUS VOLUMES AND LOADINGS
1
10
20
50
"£ *oo
„ 1»
§ 200
> 250
3UO
350
400
LOADING ( Cm/Ft3)
1
,00058
.00579
.01157
.02894
.05787
.08681
.11574
.14468
.17361
.20255
.23148
5
.00289
.029
.058
.145
.289
.434
.579
.723
.068
1.01
1.16
10
.00579
.058
.116
.289
.579
.868
1.16
1.45
1.74
2.03
2.32
15
.00068
.087
.174
.434
.868
1.30
1.74
2.17
2.60
3.04
5.47
20
.01157
.116
.231
.579
!.16
1.74
2.32
2.89
3.47
4.05
4.65
30
.01736
.174
.347
.868
1.74
2.60
3.47
4.34
5.21
6.08
6,94
40
.02315
.231
,463
1.16
2.31
3.47
4.63
5.79
6.94
8.10
9.26
50
.02894
.289
.579
1.45
2.89
4.34
5.79
7.23
8.68
10.13
11.57
60
.03472
.347
.694
1.74
3.47
5.21
6.94
8.68
10.42
12.15
13.89
70
.04051
.405
.810
2.03
4.05
6.08
8.10
10.13
12.15
14.18
16.20
; I
n
2 »
I 5
3 3
0
Z
0
Grams required = Lending (
-------
Note that the last three ingredients which represented 15.5% of the
total weight added only $.096 to the subtotal cost of Platinum and
Rhodium.
The short-cut formula substitutes 15.5% x $.67 = $.104 for the
calculated $.096, creating an error of $.008, which is only 0.11% of the
total.
CALCULATION OF THE WEIGHT OF CATALYTIC COMPOUND USED PER
CONVERTER
Volume used is expressed in cubic inches.
Leading is spoken of in grams per cubic foot. For ease of calculation
this is converted to grams per cubic inch.
1 gram/ft3 X 1/1728 = .0005787 gm/in3
Total weight equals volume times loading.
weight (grams) = volume (in ) X loading (gm/ft ) -c- 1728
The matrix given in this section gives grains required for various
combinations of volume and loading.
A- 36
RATH » STRONG
INCQUPOMTtO .
-------
CALCULATION OF THE COST OP CATALYTIC COMPOUND PER
CONVERTER
Coit per converter equals grams required {Section 2) times the cost per
gram of th« compound (Section 1) .
For purposes of ready reference, the table on the following page is presented
giving substrate compound costs at selected values of platinum-rhodium
ratio, grams required, and total platinum-rhodium content.
Also in that table the following material prices are used:
Platinum
Rhodium
Rhenium
Ruthenium
Nickel
$ S,369/gm = $167 /Troy oz.
14,628/gm = «S5/Troy cz.
1.709/gm = 53/Troy oz.
2.009/gm = 82/Troy oz.
.OOS/gm = 2.23/av. Ib.
Intermediate values may be Interpolated, or calculated directly.
Equation for calculating cost of substrate material per converter.
COST
where
r
= |(Pp + Pr)
when
1S7Pp
Pp
Pr
V
L
^
31.103 + |_1-(Pp + Pr}J .67H 1728^
+ Pr>^ ,8«5
= Percent Platinum ?• 100
= Percent Rhodium j- 100
= Volume in cubic inches
= Loading in grams per cubic foot
RATH A STRONG
IMCOMOiATIO
-------
COST OF SUBSWATi: MAIFKIAL PER CONVERTED
% Platinum + % Rhodium - 10U%
(See Note 3 if < 100%)
Line
, 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
45
16
17
ia
19
20
21
22
23
Total
Grams
Substrate
Required
(Note 1)
.029
,058
.1)6
.174
.289
.579
1.16
1.74
2.31
3.47
4.05
5.21
6.QB
6.94
7.23
8.10
9.26
10.13
11.57
12.15
13.89
14.18
16.20
I
Ratio Platinum to Rhodium and Cost Per Gram (Note 2)
2:1
$ 8.455
$ .25
.49
.98
1.47
2.44
4.90
9.81
14.71
19.53
29.34
34.24
j 44.05
51.41
5B,6fl
61.13
68. '49
7B.29
85.65
97.82
102.73
117.44
119.09
136.97
5:1
$ 6.912
$ .20
.40
.80
1.20
2.00
4.00
8.02
12.03
15.97
23.98
27.99
36.01
42.02
47.97
49.97
55.99
64.01
70.02
79,97
83.98
96.01
98.01
111.97
7:1
$ 6.526
$ .19
.38
.76
1.14
1.89
3.78
7.57
11.36
15.08
22.65
26.43
34.00
39.68
45.29
47.18
52.86
60.43
66.11
75.51
79.29
90.65
92.54
105.72
9:1
$ 6.295
$ .18
.37
.73
1.10
1.82
3.64
7.30
10.95
14.54
21.84
25.49
32.80
38.27
43.69
45,51
50.99
58.29
63.77
72.83
76.48
87.44
09.26
101.98
11:1
$ 6.141
$ .18
.36
.71
1.07
1.77
3.56
7.12
10.69
14.19
21.31
24.87
31.99
37.34
42.62
44.40
49.74
56.87
62. 2i
71,05
74.61
85.30
07.08
99.48
19}1
$ 5.832
$ .17
.34
.68
1.01
1.69
3.38
6.77
10.15
13.47
20.24
23.62
33.38
35.46
40.47
42.17
47.24
54.00
59.08
67.40
70.86
81.01
82.07
94.48
25sl
$ 5.725
$ .17
.33
.66
1.00
1.65
3.31
6,64
9.96
13.22
19.87
23.1?
29.83
34.81
39.73
41.39
46.3?
53.01
57.99
66.24
69.56
79.52
81.18
92.75
30:1
$ 5,668
$ .16
.33
.66
.99
1.64
3.26
6.5?
9.86
13.09
19.67
22.96
29.53
34.46
39.34
40.98
«.91
52.49
57.42
65.50
60. 07
78.73
80.37
91.82
I
tf
z
0
VjJ
00
-------
Note 1: Determine grams required from the table or formula below it. Locate
nearest line (or interpolate between two lines) and read $ in appro*
priate ratio column.
Note 2: Coit per gram calculated at Platinum $167/Troy 01. = $5.369/gram and
Rhodium $455/Troy oz. » $14.S28/gram,
Note 3: When Rhenium, Ruthenium of Nickel are also included in the compound,
multiply the value from the table by the combined percentages of
Platinum and Rhodium; add to this the remaining percentage times
S.67 times total grams required.
A- 39
RATH A STRONQ
INCOHPOHATIQ
-------
DETERMINATION OF MONOLITHIC SUBSTRATE SHELL DIMENSIONS
Imposed Space l*>:nts lo Shell
Dian>e^r Shell - 6.0"
She!!
Implied space limits to substrate
Diameter - 6.0 - 0.5 (metal rnesh) = 5,5"
Length - 24.0 - 1.1 (endcap) = 22.9"
Two selected shell diameters to accommodate the range of substrate
volumes: (refer to graph 4.3)
Vol (in )
0-150
151-400
Dia (in.)
4.0
5.4
Length (in.)
0-15.1
9.7-24.0
Length of shell required at given substrate volume.
Substrate
Volume (in )
1
10
20
50
100
150
151
200
250
300
350
400
Dia. She!)
(incl. mesh)
4.0 •
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.JJ
.4
,4
.4
.4
,4
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.4
Length
{incl. c
,10+1.
.95+1.
1.90+1.
4.75+1.
§.50+1.
14,26+1.
8.63+1.
11.43+1,
14.29+1.
17.15+1.
20.00+1.
22.86*1.
Shell
a2)
= 1.1
= 2.1
= 3.0
= 5.9
=10.6
=15.4
= 9.7
=12.5
=15.4
=18.3
=21.1
=23.9
A> 40
RATH & STRONG
-------
-------
DETERMINATION OF RING DIAMETER
Volume
Substrate Oia. Ring
In. In.
0-150 tt.O
151-400 5,4
A-VI
RATH & STRONG
IHCOBPOflATED
-------
RIHC COST
CAUCV LATE 0=T€
-------
MR',. COS1 CALCULATIONS - NGNCATALYTIC COMPUNI.NT'.j
5
f 5
o
2
0
Part Mal'l
Cvtr. Assy.
Shell 403 55
Kings (No.) 409 55
In. Cone 409 SS
Out. Cone 409 SS
In. Hipe 409 SS
Flanges 409 SS
Mesh 409 SS
Hdwr. Steel
Substrt. Ceramic
'wash Coat A»2 O?
[ TOTALS
Vul. - 63 (Bauu) Dia. - 4 Ltjth. -1.2
Weight
2.00
1. 00
1.00
J.OU
1.00
.2-3
.15
.10
1.30
-
Mal'l
Cost
_
.an
.40
.40
.40
.40
.10
.06
.02
4.68
.60
7.86
Labor
.2500
.0625
.0312
.0312
.0312
.0312
.0156
.0156
.0156
,1250
.0625
.6716
OH
.1000
.0250
.0125
.0125
.0125
,0125
.0062
.0062
.0062
.0500
.02>0
,26Bo
Mf(j.
Cost
.3500
.8075
.4437
.4457
.4437
.4437
.1218
.0818
.0416
A. 8550
.6875
8.8002
Cvlr. Assy.
Shell 409 SS
Rings :No.) 409 SS
In. Corn 409 SS
Out. (one 409 SS
In. Pijio 409 SS
F hinges 409 SS
Mesh 409 SS
Hdwr . Si eel
Suhslrl. Ceramic
Wash Cent Al? O^
TOTALS
Vol. - 100 Dia. - 4 Lgth. - 10.6
9.t5
2. 83
1.00
l.UU
1.00
1. 00
.25
.22
.10
2.06
.
1.13
.40
.40
.40
.40
.10
.09
.02
7.*2
.95
11.31
.2H57
.0781
.0312
.OJ12
.0312
.0312
.0156
.0200
.0156
.16U4
.IHM2
.7924
.1143
.0312
.0125
.0125
.0125
.0125
.OOf?
.OI1HO
.0062
.0674
.0337
. J 1 711
.4000
1.2393
.4437
.4437
.4437
.4437
.12!U
.1JOO
.Oalfl
7.6553
1.0679
IZ.SlSj
Vol. - 10 Dia. - 4 Lqlh. - 2.1
Weight
.76
.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
.25
.04
.10
.21
Mal'l
Cost
.
.30
.20
.40
.40
.40
.10
.02
.02
.76
.10
2.70
Labor
.1084
.0393
.0156
.0312
.0312
.0312
,0156
.0088
.0156
.0618
.0309
.4696
OH
.0754
.0157
.0062
.0125
.0125
.0125
.0062
.0035
.0052
.0247
.0124
.J878
Mfg.
Cost
.2638
.3550
.2216
.4437
.4437
.4437
.1218
.0323
.0418
.8U5
. 1433
3,357*1
Vol. - 150 Dia. - 4 Lgth. - 15.4
12.27
4.00
l.M)
J.IJO
i.no
1.00
.25
.32
.10
3.10
_
1.60
.60
.40
.40
.40
.10
.13
.02
11.16
1.43
16. 2k
.3445
.1000
.0468
.0312
.0312
.0312
.0156
.0262
.0156
.2284
.1142
.9849
.1378
.0400
.0187
.0215
.0125
.0125
.0062
.0105
.0062
.0914
.0457
.3940
.4823
1.7400
.6655
.4437
.4437
.4437
.1218
.1667
,0418
I*.* 798
1,5899
17.6189
-------
MFC. COST CALCULATIONS - NUNCATALYTIC COMPONENTS
a
j»
I
w
_.
Port Mat'l
Cvtr. Assy.
Shell 409 SS
Rings (No.) 409 SS
In. Cone 409 SS
Out. Cone 409 SS
In. Pipe 409 SS
Flanges 409 SS
Mesh 409 SS
Hdwr. Steel
Substrt. Ceramic
Wash Coat Al_ O,
TOTALS
Vol. ' 200 Oia. - 5.4 Lgth. - 12.5
Weight
15.60
4.56
2.03
1.35
1.35
1.35
.3d
.35
.14
*.U
Mat'l
Coat
_
J.82
.81
.54
.54
.54
.14
.14
.03
14.87
1.90
21.33
Labor
.4125
.1105
.056?
.0378
.0378
.0370
.0190
.0281
.0193
.2880
.1440
1.1915
OH
.1650
.0442
.0227
.0151
.0151
.0151
.0076
.0112
.0078
.1152
.0576
.4766
Mfg.
Coat
.5775
1.9747
.01194
.5929
.y)29
.5929
.1666
.1793
.0571
15.2732
2.1016
22.9981
Vol. - 250 Dia. - 5.4 Lgth. - 15.4
Weight
17.67
5.52
2.03
1.35
1.35
1.35
.34
.43
.14
5.16
-
Mal'l
Cost
_
2.21
.81
.54
.54
.54
.14
.17
.03
18.38
2.38
25, Sk
Labor
.4500
.1285
.0567
.0378
.0378
.0378
.0190
.0331
.0193
.3476
.1738
1 . 3494
Mfg.
OH Cost.
.1132
.0514
.0227
.0151
.0151
.0151
.0076
.0132
.0078
.1391
.0695
.5398
.6412
2.3899
.8894
.5929
.5929
.5929
.1666
.2163
.0571
19.0667
2,6233
27.829:
0
z
o
Cvtr. Assy.
Shcii 409 SS
Rings (No.) 409 SS
In. Cone 409 55
Out, Ccwie 409 SS
In. Pipe 409 SS
Flanges 409 SS
Mesh 409 55
Hdwr. Steel
Substrt. Ceramic
Wash Coat AI2 O^
TOTALS
Vol. - 300 Dia. - 5.4 Lgth. - 10.3
20.^0
6.47
2.70
1 = 35
1.35
1.35
.34
.51
.14
6.19
-
_
2.59
1.08
.54
.54
.54
.14
.20
.03
2.86
30.80
.5153
.1463
.0756
.0378
.0378
.0378
.0190
.0381
.0193
.4072
.2036
1.5378
.2061
.0505
.030?
.0151
.0151
.0151
.0076
.0152
.0070
.1629
.0014
.6150
.7214
2.7948
1.1850
.5929
.5929
.5929
.1666
.2533
,0571
22.8501
3.1450
32.9528
Vol. - 400 Dia. - 5.4 Lgth. - 23.9
25.14
8.31
3.38
1,35
1.35
1.35
.34
.67
.14
8.25
-
.
3.32
1.35
.54
.54
.54
.14
.27
.03
3.81
kQ. 2k
.6175
.1808
.0945
.0378
.0378
.0378
.0190
.0480
.0193
.5261
.2630
1.8816
.2470
.0723
.0378
.0151
.0151
.0151
.0076
.0192
.0078
.2104
.1052
.7526
..8645
3.5731
1.4823
.5929
.5929
.5929
.1666
.3372
.0571
JO. 436!
4.1782
tZ.Bjk:
-------
Noble Metal Prices
per Troy Ounce*
Metal Wholesale Retail
Platinum $162 $172
Iridiua 300 310
Rhodium 400 410
Paladium 60 65
Ruthenium 60 65
*Troy Ounce » 31.1035 grams
Source: Matthey-Bishop, Inc.
ft.H6
RATH 4 STRONG
lMC0«»OI*TfB
-------
AUTO HI QT i y g. AP-TE g_
So
To
sz fe^ : .
H<
. 47
-------
L »-•
*«*»
¥•'.». t'.T
-------
Y//. '//A //////,
3,
1
•« .
S"^
6 .
* »
LOS& OV COKJTWOU OC -ft
»-vA.e«s,«Ki
f8.-c.TUta.
KC fen. SLICE.
-------
fl-50
-------
/c s
ft-51
------- |