 Ford Motor Company engineers picked up where Toby Chess left off at the Collision Industry Conference (CIC) meeting July 21 resulting in a stinging indictment of selected aftermarket structural parts. Chess, an industry activist and trainer, conducted demonstrations at the November 2009 and January 2010 CIC meetings showing how certain structural aftermarket parts did not match the same quality characteristics of original equipment (OE) parts. He was set to embark on a third demonstration at the April CIC meeting in Atlanta when LKQ Corp. threatened to sue him if he proceeded. His demonstration was canceled at the last minute and many repairers were angry over what they said was a stifling of free speech. LKQ said its tests indicated the aftermarket parts met quality standards and Chess’ demonstrations were spreading misinformation. See Threatened LKQ lawsuit stifles CIC meeting. While Chess sat on the sideline during the most recent meeting, Ford engineers Paul Massie and Roger Chen provided extensive details about five aftermarket structural parts that the company tested against Ford OE parts. All five parts fell short of OE quality standards. "We will show you that these aftermarket parts are poorly constructed, are inferior quality and could compromise occupant safety in a crash," said Massie, of Ford's customer service division. Ford engineers measured a variety of characteristics including metal gauge thickness, weight, raw materials and structural integrity. They also subjected the aftermarket parts to simulated crash performance tests using computer aided engineering (CAE) analysis. Ford ordered the following aftermarket parts to compare to its OEM parts: CAE modeling was done on the two Mustang parts and the F-150 radiator core support. Aftermarket parts' metal gauge thickness and weight were less then the OEM parts with only one exception, Massie said. They also found that aftermarket parts' material usage varied significantly from OEM parts. "There were significant structural differences between the aftermarket parts and the OEM parts," said Chen, a crash development engineer in Ford Safety Engineering. One startling difference was in the Ford F-150 radiator core support. The OE part is made of lightweight magnesium and the aftermarket part was made of plastic. "We could not get a metal replacement part, we could only get plastic," Massie said. "This part became the poster child in the OE vs. aftermarket debate. In this case, the airbag sensor would be mounted in plastic instead of high-strength steel magnesium. The aftermarket part will alter the sensing of the airbag and affect airbag deployment time. The timing of the airbag deployment is an extremely important safety feature." He said the OEM radiator core support was twice the price of the aftermarket part because magnesium is more expensive than plastic. Sections were cut from both OE and aftermarket parts and sent to Ford labs to determine material composition. Aftermarket parts were electronically scanned so their dimensions could be determined and compared to Ford OE parts using CAE testing. CAE models of the aftermarket performance were built by substituting the aftermarket parts' material composition and dimensional measurements for the Ford parts. This allowed engineers to predict how both parts would perform. The differences were dramatic, according to Ford. Aftermarket bumper beams did not meet Ford engineering specifications and would have been rejected by Ford based simply on dimensional differences. In addition, aftermarket bumper beams were made of mild steel while the Ford bumper beams were made ultra-high-strength steel. Aftermarket bumper beams consisted of two stamped pieces spot-welded together while Ford bumper beam are one-piece rollformed, hot stamped at elevated temperature, water quenched in die and annealed through bake oven. In describing what that means in terms of hardness and crashworthiness, Chen said it is like "tofu versus a rock." Ford said the aftermarket parts it tested were substantially different from OE parts in raw materials, material weight and thickness, manufacturing processes to construct the part, dimensional and structural integrity and performance (for the tested bumper beam and radiator support. "They do not meet the test of like kind and quality required by 20 states for use in collision repair," Massie said. "The use of these tested aftermarket parts will change the dynamics of the crash process resulting in a differing response from the vehicle safety system than those calibrated by Ford." Massie said Ford will work with industry trade associations, automobile alliances, governmental and regulatory agencies and elected officials for oversight of aftermarket parts and their impact on the safety of the driving public.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Posted 2010-07-29 12:40:27.0
