Light weighting e-LCVs with composite materials and structural engineering | Planet Electric

Delhi NCR-based EV start-up Planet Electric recently showcased its first prototype of an electric LCV that claims a 70% reduction in vehicle weight and a battery capacity requirement reduction of up to 50%. The start-up has picked up 2,600 pre-orders. In this interaction with Co-founder and CEO Gagan Agrawal, we discuss their innovation and go-to-market strategy.

The e-LCV space has been gaining traction with Tata Ace, Jupiter, Switch Mobility, and startups like EVage launching their vehicles. What sets Planet Electric apart?

One major gap we identified in vehicle manufacturing is the weight issue. Traditionally, vehicle structures have been made from sheet metal, a practice that’s been unchanged for about 70 years. Tesla was one of the first to use die-cast aluminium, or “giga casting,” which allowed them to reduce weight and requirements significantly. However, that approach is still too costly for India.

We approached the problem by exploring affordable composites similar to those used in aerospace or aviation. Specifically, we wanted to see if these composites could provide the same strength, durability, crash safety, manufacturing speed, and repairability as sheet metal but with reduced weight. This reduction in weight would lower battery consumption and offer much better cost economics for our users.

Can you briefly explain why reducing weight is so crucial?

It’s rooted in Newton’s laws: lower mass means less force is needed to accelerate the same object. Reducing weight is crucial for efficiency, especially in payload delivery. This principle is evident in fields like launch vehicles, rockets, and marine vessels, where minimizing weight is essential due to high fuel costs. In contrast, diesel and CNG vehicles benefit from relatively low fuel costs. However, batteries and hydrogen have much lower energy densities. For instance, one litre of diesel has about 11,000 kilojoules, while batteries provide only 200 to 300 kilojoules per kilogram. This 50-fold difference in energy density results in heavier vehicles because more batteries are required to achieve the same range.

Heavier vehicles need larger batteries, reinforced structures, and more robust components, which drive up costs. This contributes to electric vehicles being priced at about twice that of diesel or CNG vehicles. The heavy structure, larger batteries, and reinforced components create a negative cascading effect that impacts adoption.

What are the main specifications of the vehicle?

The first vehicle we are introducing has a rated payload of 750 kg and a certified range of 185 kilometres. On the road, you can expect a practical range of around 130 to 140 kilometres. It is also rated for 23% gradability. Additionally, we’re incorporating our own algorithms and supervisory control, which allows us to offer a battery warranty of 250,000 kilometres, compared to the 175,000 kilometres offered by some competitors. The battery pack for this vehicle is 15 kilowatt-hours. Target price is INR 10.5 lakhs.

Based on the specifications I mentioned, the target curb weight for our vehicle is around 700 to 750 kilograms. For context, the Tata Ace EV has a curb weight of around 1,240 kilograms.

What feedback did you collect from fleet operators running electric LCVs, and how did you address those issues to ensure your vehicle meets their needs?

We addressed several key issues based on feedback from fleet operators:

1. Payload Capacity: Adding heavy batteries to existing diesel or CNG vehicle chassis often reduces payload capacity, impacting revenue. We have worked to ensure our design maintains payload capacity despite the added weight of the batteries.

2. Volumetric Loading: Electric vehicles are increasingly used in e-commerce and last-mile delivery, where packages are often larger but lighter. We have designed our vehicle to offer more volumetric loading capacity, exceeding the standard 200 cubic feet found in similar vehicles.

3. Reliance: Operators have struggled to scale up three-wheelers to higher load capacities due to issues like steep gradients and engineering limitations. Our vehicle is designed to handle payloads of 750 kg to 1,000 kg with a daily range of 90 to 100 kilometres. It also ensures durability for about 7 to 8 years with a 23% or higher gradability.

We focused on a ground-up approach to design, rather than just light weighting individual components. By light weighting the chassis and body, we aim to achieve over 500 kg of weight reduction, enabling us to address these challenges effectively.

Are fleet operators currently saving money by opting for electric LCVs?

Not right now. Currently, CNG or diesel vehicles typically have an EMI of around ₹13,000 per month, while an electric vehicle on a similar platform might have an EMI of about ₹23,000. The difference in the cost of electricity vs diesel or CNG comes at about ₹5,000 per month, and sometimes even less, i.e. ₹3,000 to ₹4,000 with fast charging. However, the typical profit margins in this business are around ₹4,000 to ₹5,000, so the savings from the lower EMI and fuel costs aren’t sufficient to make a profit.

This often forces fleet operators to run two shifts to cover costs and achieve profitability. The problem with running two shifts is that there may not be enough business to sustain it, and the upfront cost of the EV becomes a significant burden compared to the lower EMI of CNG vehicles.

To address this, we need to lower both the EMI and charging costs so operators can make a profit with just one shift. Additionally, increasing the volumetric loading capacity is essential to help operators generate extra revenue—around ₹5,000 to ₹6,000 more. This would improve the EV’s competitiveness and profitability compared to CNG vehicles.

A few players are working on retrofitting old LCVs to electric vehicles. Is this a long-term sustainable solution for electrification?

Comparing OEMs and retrofit players, the process is fundamentally similar. OEMs start with a chassis and integrate an electric powertrain, battery, and software. Retrofitters, on the other hand, typically take an existing vehicle, remove the engine and other components, and install an electric system. This can be more expensive because you’re working with a vehicle not originally designed for electric propulsion, which often results in higher costs—typically around ₹1 lakh to ₹1.5 lakh more than an OEM vehicle.

If retrofitters can source the chassis and then retrofit it, there might be a niche market for this approach, particularly among early adopters willing to pay a premium for electric transportation. However, retrofit solutions often lack fundamental efficiencies and can be less cost-effective compared to purpose-built electric vehicles. For long-term sustainability and profitability, retrofitters may need to evolve into a proper OEM model to achieve better margins and efficiencies.

Can you provide more details about the lightweight materials you’re using and explain why others might not be using them?

Industries are built around established vendor bases, and sheet metal has been the norm for over 70 years. Changing this process overnight is unlikely because manufacturers have long-standing suppliers and processes for casting, stamping, welding, and painting. As a result, changes tend to be incremental, focusing on lightweighting specific components like fenders, seats, or doors, which only achieve modest weight reductions (2% to 5%).

The need for innovation in materials and structural engineering has become more apparent with the shift to electric and hydrogen vehicles.

Unlike sheet metal, composites are anisotropic, meaning their strength varies in different directions due to the fibre and resin structure. This necessitates different design and simulation techniques compared to traditional sheet metal. The expertise required for working with composites is not widely available within traditional OEMs. While large OEMs could potentially acquire this knowledge, they face challenges justifying the capital expenditure required for new processes and equipment, especially when it might cannibalize existing investments.

While composite approaches have been explored in the U.S. and Europe since the 1990s, they are still relatively new in India. In recent years, the focus has been on BS-6 upgrade capex, making it challenging to shift to new materials and processes.

Could you walk us through your go-to-market strategy?

We raised a small pre-seed round last year, which helped us reach the prototype stage. We’re currently closing a convertible round and will soon seek a larger funding round to complete customer testing, obtain certifications, and secure the necessary supplier capex for developing dies and molds for composite structures. We’re also exploring options for contractual manufacturing to minimize our capital expenditure on plant facilities. We aim to consolidate all these aspects around March 2025 to initiate production. The next nine months will be crucial for us, with tight deadlines to meet.

Licensing out or partnering with large OEMs would be more straightforward, but we haven’t achieved that yet. The complexities involved in maintaining intellectual property and ensuring compatibility across numerous mountings and connections pose significant hurdles. We hope to address these challenges in the future, but for now, our focus is on successfully bringing our vehicles to market.

By September, we’ll have five more prototypes ready, and then we’ll start customer testing. We are very confident that what we set out to build is feasible and can be constructed at a reasonable cost.

Can you please tell us about the IP created so far?

We have filed two patents in the U.S. so far. These patents cover our unique design approach, which differs significantly from previous methods. They address how we optimize the manufacturing process, integrate various components, and handle issues related to bending and torsional forces in composite structures. Our patents also cover solutions for challenges like chassis and axle durability. We have a series of patents planned for various sub-structural aspects and engineering problems we’re addressing.

Please tell us about your team and its composition.

Founding team consists of me and Prakhar; we have been working together since college. We both have backgrounds in space science and technology and have worked at the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO). Prakhar has extensive experience in composite structures for launch vehicles and satellites, while I focused on hypersonics and project management, including aeroplasticity.

As the founders, we lead a team of auto experts with experience from companies like Tata, Stellantis, Hyundai, Bosch, and Tesla. This diverse experience helps us understand different industry perspectives and innovations, allowing us to avoid past mistakes and integrate best practices into our own work.

Also read: Switch Mobility launches e-LCVs Bada Dost (IEV4) and Chhota Dost (IEV3)