Upload
dinhdang
View
238
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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
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?
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
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).
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
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
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?
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
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
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
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)
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)
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
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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
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:
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
= ≥
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
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!
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!
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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.
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.
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
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
= ∆
==
= =
=
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 −
≤
≤ =
= ≤ ×
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.