44
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory ©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection – Slide 1 Materials Selection Materials Selection for for Mechanical Design I Mechanical Design I A Brief Overview of a Systematic Methodology A Brief Overview of a Systematic Methodology Jeremy Gregory Jeremy Gregory Research Associate Research Associate Laboratory for Energy and Environment Laboratory for Energy and Environment

Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection – Slide 1

Materials Selection Materials Selection for for

Mechanical Design IMechanical Design I

A Brief Overview of a Systematic MethodologyA Brief Overview of a Systematic MethodologyJeremy GregoryJeremy GregoryResearch AssociateResearch Associate

Laboratory for Energy and EnvironmentLaboratory for Energy and Environment

Page 2: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 2

Relationship To CourseRelationship To CourseA key concept throughout this course is A key concept throughout this course is how to select among technology choiceshow to select among technology choices

Economic AnalysisEconomic AnalysisCost ModelingCost ModelingLife Cycle AssessmentLife Cycle Assessment

Focus has been on economic assessment Focus has been on economic assessment of alternativesof alternativesHow does this fit into larger technology How does this fit into larger technology choice problem?choice problem?

Page 3: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 3

Concept

Embodiment

Detail

Market need

Production etc.

# of CandidatesD

esig

n D

etai

l

Cos

t Mod

elin

g

Econ

omic

Ana

lysi

s

LCA

Selection MethodsSelection Methods

Method Needed for Early Stage

Approach Changes as Design EvolvesApproach Changes as Design Evolves

Page 4: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 4

What parameters define material selection?What parameters define material selection?

Example: SUV LiftgateExample: SUV Liftgate

Image removed for copyright reasons.Schematic of components in an SUV liftgate (rear door).

Page 5: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 5

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

0 25 50 75 100 125

Annual Production Volume (1000s)

Uni

t Cos

t

SteelAluminumSMC

Attractive Options Attractive Options May Be Found Outside of ExpertiseMay Be Found Outside of Expertise

Page 6: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 6

Need Method for Early Material Selection: Need Method for Early Material Selection: Ashby Methodology* Ashby Methodology* Four basic stepsFour basic steps1.1. Translation:Translation: express design requirements express design requirements

as constraints & objectivesas constraints & objectives2.2. Screening:Screening: eliminate materials that cannot eliminate materials that cannot

do the jobdo the job3.3. Ranking:Ranking: find the materials that do the job find the materials that do the job

bestbest4.4. Supporting information:Supporting information: explore pedigrees explore pedigrees

of topof top--ranked candidatesranked candidatesM.F. Ashby, Materials Selection in Mechanical Design, 3rd Ed., Elsevier, 2005

Page 7: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 7

First Step: TranslationFirst Step: Translation“Express design requirements as constraints and objectives”

Using design requirements, analyze four items:Using design requirements, analyze four items:Function:Function: What does the component do?What does the component do?

Do not limit options by specifying implementation w/in Do not limit options by specifying implementation w/in functionfunction

Objective:Objective: What essential conditions must be met?What essential conditions must be met?In what manner should implementation excel?In what manner should implementation excel?

Constraints:Constraints: What is to be maximized or minimized?What is to be maximized or minimized?Differentiate between binding and soft constraintsDifferentiate between binding and soft constraints

Free variables:Free variables: Which design variables are free? Which design variables are free? Which can be modified?Which can be modified?Which are desirable?Which are desirable?

Page 8: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 8

F FArea, A L

Identifying Desirable CharacteristicsIdentifying Desirable CharacteristicsExample: Materials for a Light, Strong TieExample: Materials for a Light, Strong Tie

Function:Function:Support a tension loadSupport a tension load

Objective:Objective:Minimize massMinimize mass

Constraints:Constraints:Length specifiedLength specifiedCarry load F, w/o failureCarry load F, w/o failure

Free variables:Free variables:CrossCross--section areasection areaMaterial Material

Objective:Objective:m = ALρ

Constraint:Constraint:F / A < σy

Page 9: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 9

F FArea, A L

Identifying Desirable CharacteristicsIdentifying Desirable CharacteristicsExample: Materials for a Light, Strong TieExample: Materials for a Light, Strong Tie

Objective:Objective:m = ALρ

Constraint:Constraint:F / A < σy

Rearrange to eliminate Rearrange to eliminate free variable free variable

Minimize weight by Minimize weight by minimizingminimizing

( )( )y

m F L ρσ

⎛ ⎞≥ ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟

⎝ ⎠

y

ρσ

⎛ ⎞⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟⎝ ⎠

Material Index

yσρ

⎛ ⎞⎜ ⎟⎝ ⎠

or maximize

Page 10: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 10

Second Step: ScreeningSecond Step: Screening“Eliminate materials that cannot do the job”

Need effective way of Need effective way of evaluating large range evaluating large range of material classes of material classes and propertiesand properties

CompositesSandwiches

HybridsLattices

Segmented

PE, PP, PCPS, PET, PVC

PA (Nylon)

PolymersPolyester

Epoxy

Soda glassBorosilicate

GlassesSilica glass

Glass ceramic

IsopreneButyl rubber

ElastomersNatural rubber

SiliconesEVA

AluminaSi-carbide

CeramicsSi-nitrideZiconia

SteelsCast ironsAl-alloys

MetalsCu-alloysTi-alloys

Page 11: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 11

Comparing Material Properties:Comparing Material Properties:Material Bar ChartsMaterial Bar Charts

Metals Polymers Ceramics Hybrids

PEEK

PP

PTFE

WC

Alumina

Glass

CFRP

GFRP

Fiberboard

Y ou n

g ’s

mod

ulus

(GP a

) (L

og S

cale

)

Steel

Copper

Lead

Zinc

Aluminum

Good for elementary selection (e.g., find materials with large modulus)

Page 12: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 12

Comparing Material Properties:Comparing Material Properties:Material Property ChartsMaterial Property Charts

0.1

10

1

100

Metals

Polymers

Elastomers

Ceramics

Woods

Composites

Foams

0.01

1000

1000.1 1 10Density (Mg/m3)

You

ng’s

mod

ulus

(GP

a)

Page 13: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 13

Screening Example:Screening Example:Heat Sink for Power ElectronicsHeat Sink for Power Electronics

Function:Function:Heat SinkHeat Sink

Constraints:Constraints:1.1. Max service temp > 200 C Max service temp > 200 C 2.2. Electrical insulator Electrical insulator

R > 10R > 102020 µµohmohm cm cm 3.3. Thermal conductor Thermal conductor

TT--conduct. conduct. λλ > 100 W/m K> 100 W/m K4.4. Not heavy Not heavy

Density < 3 Mg/mDensity < 3 Mg/m33

Free Variables:Free Variables:Materials and ProcessesMaterials and Processes

Page 14: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 14

Heat Sink Screening: Bar ChartHeat Sink Screening: Bar Chart

200 C

Max

ser

vice

tem

pera

ture

(K)

PEEKPP

PTFE

WC

Alumina

Glass

CFRP

GFRP

Fiberboard

Steel

Copper

LeadZinc

Aluminum

CompositesCeramicsPolymersMetals

Page 15: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 15

Heat Sink Screening: Property ChartHeat Sink Screening: Property Chart

λ > 100 W/m K

R > 1020 µΩ cm1000

0.1

Metals

Polymers & elastomersComposites

Foams

10301 1010 1020

Electrical resistivity ( µΩ cm)

Ther

mal

con

duct

ivity

(W/m

K) Ceramics

10

1

100

0.01

Page 16: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 16

Example using Example using GrantaGranta Software:Software:Automobile Headlight LensAutomobile Headlight Lens

Function:Function:Protect bulb and lens; focus beamProtect bulb and lens; focus beam

Objective:Objective:Minimize costMinimize cost

Constraints:Constraints:Transparent w/ optical qualityTransparent w/ optical qualityEasily moldedEasily moldedGood resistance to fresh and salt waterGood resistance to fresh and salt waterGood resistance to UV lightGood resistance to UV lightGood abrasion resistance (high hardness)Good abrasion resistance (high hardness)

Free variables:Free variables:MaterialMaterial choicechoice

Photo of headlight removed for copyright reasons.

Page 17: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 17

Selection Criteria Selection Criteria –– Limit StageLimit Stage

Chart from the CES EduPack 2005, Granta Design Limited, Cambridge, UK. (c) Granta Design. Courtesy of Granta Design Limited. Used with permission.

Page 18: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 18

Property ChartProperty Chart

••Cheapest, hardest Cheapest, hardest material is sodamaterial is soda--lime glass lime glass –– used used in car headlightsin car headlights

••For plastics, For plastics, cheapest is PMMA cheapest is PMMA –– used in car tail used in car tail lightslights

Price (USD/kg)0.1 1 10 100

Har

dnes

s - V

icke

rs (P

a)

10000

100000

1e6

1e7

1e8

1e9

1e10

Concrete

Soda-lime glass

Borosilicate glass

Polymethyl methacrylate (Acrylic, PMMA)

Chart from the CES EduPack 2005, Granta Design Limited, Cambridge, UK. (c) Granta Design. Courtesy of Granta Design Limited. Used with permission.

Page 19: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 19

Third Step: RankingThird Step: Ranking““Find the materials that do the job bestFind the materials that do the job best””What if multiple materials are selected after What if multiple materials are selected after

screening?screening?Which one is best?Which one is best?What if there are multiple material parameters What if there are multiple material parameters

for evaluation?for evaluation?

Use Material IndexUse Material Index

Page 20: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 20

Single Property Ranking Example:Single Property Ranking Example:Overhead Transmission CableOverhead Transmission Cable

Function:Function:Transmit electricityTransmit electricity

Objective:Objective:Minimize electrical ResistanceMinimize electrical Resistance

Constraints:Constraints:Length L and section A are specifiedLength L and section A are specifiedMust not fail under wind or iceMust not fail under wind or ice--load load required required tensile strength > 80 tensile strength > 80 MPaMPa

Free variables:Free variables:MaterialMaterial choicechoice

L

eLRA

ρ=Electricalresistivity

Screen on strength, rank on resistivity

Page 21: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 21

The selection

Res

istiv

ity (µ

ohm

.cm

)

1e-3

1

1000

1e6

1e9

1e12

1e15

1e18

1e21

1e24

1e27

Copper alloysAluminium alloys

Magnesium alloys

Titanium alloys

Low alloy steel

Polystyrene (PS)Silica glass

Cork

Silicon Carbide

Boron Carbide

AluminaPEEK

EpoxiesPETE

Cellulose polymers

Polyester

Polyurethane (tpPUR)

Isoprene (IR)

Wood

Single Property Ranking Example:Single Property Ranking Example:Overhead Transmission CableOverhead Transmission Cable

Res

istiv

ity (µ

-ohm

cm

)

••Screening on Screening on strength eliminates strength eliminates polymers, some polymers, some ceramicsceramics

••Ranking on Ranking on resistivity selectsresistivity selectsAl and Cu alloysAl and Cu alloys

Chart from the CES EduPack 2005, Granta Design Limited, Cambridge, UK. (c) Granta Design. Courtesy of Granta Design Limited. Used with permission.

Page 22: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 22

Advanced Ranking: The Material IndexAdvanced Ranking: The Material IndexThe methodThe method1.1. Identify Identify functionfunction, , constraintsconstraints, , objectiveobjective and and free variablesfree variables

List simple constraints for screeningList simple constraints for screening2.2. Write down equation for Write down equation for objectiveobjective ---- the the ““performance performance

equationequation””If objective involves a If objective involves a free variablefree variable (other than the material):(other than the material):

Identify the Identify the constraintconstraint that limits itthat limits itUse this to Use this to eliminate the free variableeliminate the free variable in performance in performance equationequation

3.3. Read off the combination of material properties that Read off the combination of material properties that maximizes performance maximizes performance ---- the the material indexmaterial index

4.4. Use this for Use this for rankingranking

Page 23: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 23

The Performance Equation, The Performance Equation, PP

( )

Functional Geometric Material, ,

requirements, parameters, properties,

or, ,

PF G M

P f F G M

⎡ ⎤⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞= ⎢ ⎥⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎣ ⎦

=

( )( )y

m F L ρσ

⎛ ⎞≥ ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟

⎝ ⎠

Use constraints to eliminate free variableUse constraints to eliminate free variable

P P from previous example of a light, strong tie:from previous example of a light, strong tie:

Page 24: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 24

F

Area, A

L

The Material IndexThe Material IndexExample: Materials for a stiff, light beamExample: Materials for a stiff, light beam

Function:Function:Support a bending loadSupport a bending load

Objective:Objective:Minimize massMinimize mass

Constraints:Constraints:Length specifiedLength specifiedCarry load F, without too Carry load F, without too much deflectionmuch deflection

Free variables:Free variables:CrossCross--section areasection areaMaterial Material

Objective:Objective:m = ALρ

Constraint:Constraint:

Deflection, δ

3

F CEISLδ

= ≥

Page 25: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 25

The Material IndexThe Material IndexExample: Materials for a stiff, light beamExample: Materials for a stiff, light beam

Objective:Objective:m = ALρ

Constraint:Constraint:

Rearrange to eliminate Rearrange to eliminate free variable free variable

Minimize weight by Minimize weight by minimizingminimizing

1/ 2 5/ 2

1/ 2 1/ 2

4F LmC E

π ρδ

⎛ ⎞⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞= ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎝ ⎠

1/ 2Eρ⎛ ⎞

⎜ ⎟⎝ ⎠

Material Index

1/ 2Eρ

⎛ ⎞⎜ ⎟⎝ ⎠

or maxim

ize

3

F CEISLδ

= ≥

F

Area, A

L

Deflection, δ

Page 26: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 26

Material Index Calculation Process FlowMaterial Index Calculation Process Flow

FUNCTIONTie

Beam

Shaft

Column

Mechanical,Thermal,

Electrical...

Each combination ofFunctionConstraintObjectiveFree variable

has a characterizing material index

CONSTRAINTS

Stiffnessspecified

Strengthspecified

Fatigue limit

Geometryspecified

Minimum cost

Minimumweight

Maximum energy storage

Minimum eco- impact

OBJECTIVE

INDEX 1/ 2EMρ

⎡ ⎤= ⎢ ⎥

⎣ ⎦

Maximize this!

Page 27: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 27

Material Index ExamplesMaterial Index ExamplesAn objective defines a An objective defines a performance metricperformance metric: e.g. mass or resistance: e.g. mass or resistanceThe equation for performance metric contains The equation for performance metric contains material propertiesmaterial propertiesSometimes a single propertySometimes a single propertySometimes a combinationSometimes a combination

Either is aEither is aMaterial IndexMaterial Index

σσff22/3/3//ρρGG1/21/2//ρρTorsionTorsion

σσff22/3/3//ρρEE1/21/2//ρρBendingBending

σσff//ρρE/E/ρρTensionTension

Strength Strength LimitedLimited

Stiffness Stiffness LimitedLimitedLoadingLoading

Material Indices for a BeamMaterial Indices for a Beam

Objective:Objective:Minimize MassMinimize Mass

Performance Metric:Performance Metric:MassMass

Maximize!Maximize!

Page 28: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 28

Optimized Selection Using Optimized Selection Using Material Indices & Property Charts: StrengthMaterial Indices & Property Charts: StrengthExample: Example:

Tension Load, Tension Load, strength limitedstrength limitedMaximize: Maximize: M = σ/ρIn log space:In log space:log σ = log ρ + log MThis is a set of lines This is a set of lines with slope=1with slope=1Materials above line Materials above line are candidatesare candidates

Foams

Elastomers

PolymersWoods

Composites

Metals

Ceramics

Page 29: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 29

Material Indices & Property Charts: Material Indices & Property Charts: StiffnessStiffnessExample: Example:

Stiff beamStiff beamMaximize: Maximize: Μ = Ε1/2/ρIn log space:In log space:log E = 2 (log ρ + log M)This is a set of lines This is a set of lines with slope=2with slope=2Candidates change Candidates change with objectivewith objective

FoamsElastomers

PolymersWoods

Composites Metals

Ceramics

Page 30: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 30

Material Indices & Property Charts: Material Indices & Property Charts: ToughnessToughness

LoadLoad--limitedlimitedM = KIC

Choose tough Choose tough metals, e.g. Timetals, e.g. Ti

EnergyEnergy--limitedlimitedM = KIC

2 / EComposites and Composites and metals competemetals compete

DisplacementDisplacement--limitedlimitedM = KIC / EPolymers, foamsPolymers, foams

KIC

KIC2/E

KIC/E

Foams

PolymersWoods

CompositesMetals

Ceramics

Page 31: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 31

Considering Multiple Considering Multiple Objectives/ConstraintsObjectives/Constraints

With multiple With multiple constraintsconstraints::Solve each individuallySolve each individuallySelect candidates based on eachSelect candidates based on eachEvaluate performance of eachEvaluate performance of eachSelect performance based on most limitingSelect performance based on most limiting

May be different for each candidateMay be different for each candidateWith multiple With multiple objectivesobjectives::

Requires utility function to map multiple Requires utility function to map multiple metrics to common performance measuresmetrics to common performance measures

Page 32: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 32

Method for Early Technology ScreeningMethod for Early Technology ScreeningDesign performance is Design performance is determined by the determined by the combination of:combination of:

ShapeShapeMaterialsMaterialsProcessProcess

Underlying principles of Underlying principles of selection are unchangedselection are unchanged

BUT, do not underestimate BUT, do not underestimate impact of shape or the impact of shape or the limitation of processlimitation of process

Materials

Process

Shape

Page 33: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 33

Ashby Method for Early Material Selection:Ashby Method for Early Material Selection:Four basic stepsFour basic steps1.1. Translation:Translation: express design requirements express design requirements

as constraints & objectivesas constraints & objectives2.2. Screening:Screening: eliminate materials that cannot eliminate materials that cannot

do the jobdo the job3.3. Ranking:Ranking: find the materials that do the job find the materials that do the job

bestbest4.4. Supporting information:Supporting information: explore pedigrees explore pedigrees

of topof top--ranked candidatesranked candidates

Page 34: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 34

SummarySummaryMaterial affects design based onMaterial affects design based on

Geometric specificsGeometric specificsLoading requirementsLoading requirementsDesign constraintsDesign constraintsPerformance objectivePerformance objective

Effects can be assessed analyticallyEffects can be assessed analyticallyKeep candidate set large as long as is feasibleKeep candidate set large as long as is feasibleMaterials charts give quick overview; software can Materials charts give quick overview; software can be used to more accurately find optionsbe used to more accurately find optionsRemember, strategic considerations can alter best Remember, strategic considerations can alter best choicechoice

Page 35: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 35

Example Problem: Table LegsExample Problem: Table Legs

Want to redesign table with thin unbraced cylindrical Want to redesign table with thin unbraced cylindrical legslegsWant to minimize crossWant to minimize cross--section and mass without section and mass without bucklingbucklingToughness and cost are factorsToughness and cost are factors

Figure by MIT OCW.

Page 36: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 36

Function:Function:Support compressive loadsSupport compressive loads

Objective:Objective:Minimize massMinimize massMaximize slendernessMaximize slenderness

Constraints:Constraints:Length specifiedLength specifiedMust not buckleMust not buckleMust not fractureMust not fracture

Free variables:Free variables:CrossCross--section areasection areaMaterial Material

Table Legs: Problem DefinitionTable Legs: Problem Definition

2m r lπ ρ=2 3 4

2 24critEI ErP

l lπ π

= =

Performance EquationPerformance Equation

Page 37: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 37

Table Legs: Material IndicesTable Legs: Material IndicesUse constraints to Use constraints to

eliminate free variable, eliminate free variable, rr

( )1/ 2

21/ 2

4Pm lEρ

π⎛ ⎞ ⎡ ⎤≥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎥⎝ ⎠ ⎣ ⎦

Minimize mass by Minimize mass by maximizing maximizing MM11

1/ 2

1EMρ

=

FunctionalFunctionalRequirementsRequirements

GeometricGeometricParametersParameters

MaterialMaterialPropertiesProperties

For slenderness, For slenderness, calculate calculate rr at max loadat max load

( )1/ 4 1/ 4

1/ 23

4 1Pr lEπ

⎛ ⎞ ⎡ ⎤≥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎥⎝ ⎠ ⎣ ⎦

Maximize slenderness Maximize slenderness by maximizing by maximizing MM22

2M E=

FunctionalFunctionalRequirementsRequirements

GeometricGeometricParametersParameters

MaterialMaterialPropertiesProperties

Page 38: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 38

Table Legs: Material SelectionTable Legs: Material SelectionEliminatedEliminated

Metals (too heavy)Metals (too heavy)Polymers Polymers (not stiff enough)(not stiff enough)

Possibilities: Ceramics, Possibilities: Ceramics, wood, compositeswood, compositesFinal choice: Final choice: woodwood

Ceramics too brittleCeramics too brittleComposites too Composites too expensiveexpensive

Note: higher constraint Note: higher constraint on modulus eliminates on modulus eliminates woodwood

Elastomers

Polymers

Woods

Composites

Metals

Ceramics

Foams

M2

M1

Page 39: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 39

Material Index 1Material Index 1

Density (kg/m^3)100 1000 10000

You

ng's

Mod

ulus

(GP

a)

1e-3

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

Softwood: pine, along grain

Bamboo

Hardwood: oak, along grain

CFRP, epoxy matrix (isotropic)

Silicon Boron carbideSilicon carbide

Rigid Polymer Foam (LD)

Chart from the CES EduPack 2005, Granta Design Limited, Cambridge, UK. (c) Granta Design. Courtesy of Granta Design Limited. Used with permission.

Page 40: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 40

Material Index 2Material Index 2

Density (kg/m^3)100 1000 10000

You

ng's

Mod

ulus

(Pa)

1e6

1e7

1e8

1e9

1e10

1e11

Bamboo

Softwood: pine, along grain

Hardwood: oak, along grain

CFRP, epoxy matrix (isotropic)

Boron carbide Silicon carbide

Chart from the CES EduPack 2005, Granta Design Limited, Cambridge, UK. (c) Granta Design. Courtesy of Granta Design Limited. Used with permission.

Page 41: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 41

Example: HeatExample: Heat--Storing WallStoring WallOuter surface Outer surface heated by dayheated by dayAir blown over Air blown over inner surface to inner surface to extract heat at extract heat at nightnightInner wall must Inner wall must heat up ~12h after heat up ~12h after outer wallouter wall

Figure by MIT OCW.

Air flow to extract heat from wall

Fan

Sun

Hea

t Sto

ring

Wal

l

W

Page 42: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 42

HeatHeat--Storing Wall: Problem DefinitionStoring Wall: Problem DefinitionFunction:Function:

Heat storing mediumHeat storing mediumObjective:Objective:

Maximize thermal energy Maximize thermal energy stored per unit coststored per unit cost

Constraints:Constraints:Heat diffusion time ~12hHeat diffusion time ~12hWall thickness Wall thickness ≤≤ 0.5 m0.5 mWorking temp Working temp TTmaxmax>100 C>100 C

Free variables:Free variables:Wall thickness, Wall thickness, wwMaterialMaterial

2

Heat content: Heat diffusion distance:

Specific Heat

Thermal Diffusivity

Thermal Conductivity

p

p

p

Q w C T

w atC

aC

ρ

λρ

λ

= ∆

==

= =

=

Page 43: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 43

HeatHeat--Storing Wall: Material IndicesStoring Wall: Material Indices

1/ 2

1/ 2

1 1/ 2

2

2

Eliminate free variable:

Insert to obtainPerformance Eqn:

Maximize:

pQ t Ta C

Q t Ta

Ma

ρ

λ

λ

λ

= ∆

⎛ ⎞= ∆ ⎜ ⎟⎝ ⎠

=

2

62

20.5 123 10 2

Thickness restriction:

For m and h: m /s

wat

w tM a −

≤ =

= ≤ ×

Page 44: Materials Selection for Mechanical Design I

Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Massachusetts Materials Systems Laboratory

©Jeremy Gregory and Randolph Kirchain, 2005 Materials Selection I – Slide 44

HeatHeat--Storing Wall: Material SelectionStoring Wall: Material SelectionEliminatedEliminated

Foams: Too Foams: Too porousporousMetals: Diffusivity Metals: Diffusivity too hightoo high

Possibilities: Possibilities: Concrete, stone, Concrete, stone, brick, glass, brick, glass, titanium(!)titanium(!)Final ChoicesFinal Choices

Concrete is Concrete is cheapestcheapestStone is best Stone is best performer at performer at reasonable pricereasonable price

Chart from the CES EduPack 2005, Granta Design Limited, Cambridge, UK. (c) Granta Design. Courtesy of Granta Design Limited. Used with permission.