ارزیابی مزایای دانش پروژه های "تحقیق و توسعه" درباره مواد " وزن دهی سبک به خودرو"
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|17277||2009||10 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Evaluation and Program Planning, Volume 32, Issue 3, August 2009, Pages 300–309
This paper presents a set of metrics used to evaluate short-run knowledge benefits that accrued from research and development (R&D) projects funded in fiscal years 2000–2004 by automotive lightweighting materials (ALM) of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Although DOE presents to Congress energy, environmental, and security benefits and costs of its R&D efforts under the Government Performance and Results Act, DOE has yet to include knowledge benefits in that report [U.S. Department of Energy. (2007). Projected benefits of federal energy efficiency and renewable energy programs: FY2008 budget request. NREL/TP-640-41347 (March). Washington, DC: National Renewable Energy Laboratory for DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Retrieved February 12, 2007 from http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ba/pba/2008_benefits.html]. ALM focuses on development and validation of advanced technologies that significantly reduce automotive vehicle body and chassis weight without compromising other attributes such as safety, performance, recyclability, and cost [U.S. Department of Energy. (2005a). Automotive lightweighting materials 2004 annual progress report. Washington, DC: DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Retrieved March 30, 2005 from http://www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/resources/fcvt_alm_fy04.shtml]. The ultimate goal of ALM to have lightweighter materials in vehicles hinges on many issues, including the (1) collaborative nature of ALMs R&D with the automobile industry and (2) manufacturing knowledge gained through the R&D effort. The ALM projects evaluated in this paper yielded numerous knowledge benefits in the short run. While these knowledge benefits are impressive, there remains uncertainty about whether the research will lead to incorporation of lightweight materials by the Big Three automakers into their manufacturing process and introduction of lightweight vehicles into the marketplace. The uncertainty illustrates a difference between (1) knowledge benefits and (2) energy, environmental, and security benefits emanating from R&D.
This paper presents the results of an evaluation of research and development (R&D) projects funded during fiscal years 2000–2004 by the automotive lightweighting materials (ALM) effort of the FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies program of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). ALM focuses on the development and validation of advanced technologies that significantly reduce automotive vehicle body and chassis weight without compromising other attributes such as safety, performance, recyclability, and cost (U.S. DOE, 2005a). Funded projects range from applied materials science research to applied research in production environments. Collaborators on these projects include national laboratories, universities, private-sector firms such as leading automobile manufacturers and their suppliers, and non-profit technology organizations.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
This evaluation sought to assess short-run knowledge benefits that may be attributable to ALM R&D projects. Funded projects included in this evaluation range from applied materials science research to applied research in production environments. The R&D projects covered here also reflect the range of collaborators indicative of ALM projects: national laboratories, universities, Big Three automakers and their suppliers, and non-profit organizations. Four major lightweighting materials are reviewed in this evaluation: advanced high-strength steel, aluminum, carbon-fiber composites, and magnesium. Collectively, the nine projects selected are illustrative of major lightweighting materials research areas undertaken by ALM. We selected three methods to evaluate knowledge benefits from the R&D projects. We used multiple indicators for measuring each. The methods used are (1) qualitative assessment, (2) indicators recommended by the National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, and (3) quantitative benefits. There are two perspectives that can be taken from this evaluation.