Advanced Methods in Materials Selection

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Design Core Market Assessment Specification Concept Design Detail Design Manufacture Sell DETAIL DESIGN A vast subject. We will concentrate on: Materials.
Advertisements

Graduation Project Thesis: Structural Analysis & Design of “Al-Mansour Mall”
Axial Members WORKSHEET 11 to answer just click on the button or image related to the answer.
STATICALLY DETERMINATE STRESS SYSTEMS
MATERIALS TESTING.
1 Thin Walled Pressure Vessels. 2 Consider a cylindrical vessel section of: L = Length D = Internal diameter t = Wall thickness p = fluid pressure inside.
Professor Joe Greene CSU, CHICO
IFB 2012 Materials Selection in Mechanical Design
Normal Strain and Stress
Beams and Frames.
Advanced Methods in Materials Selection
Finite Element Model Generation Model size Element class – Element type, Number of dimensions, Size – Plane stress & Plane strain – Higher order elements.
IFB 2012 INTRODUCTION Material Indices1/12 IFB 2012 Materials Selection in Mechanical Design INTRODUCTION Materials Selection Without Shape (1/2) Textbook.
Designing for Stiffness
BARTOSZEK ENGINEERING 1 Review of the Stress Analysis of the MiniBooNE Horn MH1 Larry Bartoszek, P.E. 1/20/00 BARTOSZEK ENGINEERING.
Design of an Aerospace Component
MECH Lecture 6 (1/3) Shape Factors 1/23 Material and Shape: Textbook Chapters 11 and 12 Lecture 6 (1/3) Efficient? Materials for efficient structures.
MECH Lecture 5 Case Studies Ch 61/22 MECH Materials Selection in Mechanical Design Lecture 5 Materials Selection Without Shape (2/2):
Compression BADI Y1.
BEARING OR CRUSHING Bearing Stresses (Compression Perpendicular to the Grain) Allowable stresses for compression perpendicular to the grain are available.
Materials Selection Without Shape...when function is independent of shape...
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd
ENGR 220 Section 13.1~13.2.
ENGR 225 Section
Static and Fatigue Bolt Design
NAZARIN B. NORDIN What you will learn: Strength, elasticity, ductility, malleability, brittleness, toughness, hardness Ferrous/ non-ferrous.
University of Sydney – Structures SECTIONS Peter Smith & Mike Rosenman l The size and shape of the cross- section of the piece of material used l For timber,
WORKSHEET 2 FAILURE, STRESS AND STRAIN
University of Palestine
CTC / MTC 222 Strength of Materials Final Review.
FYI: All three types of stress are measured in newtons / meter2 but all have different effects on solids. Materials Solids are often placed under stress.
FOOTINGS. FOOTINGS Introduction Footings are structural elements that transmit column or wall loads to the underlying soil below the structure. Footings.
High strength materials are being increasingly used in designing critical components to save weight or meet difficult service conditions. Unfortunately.
Ken YoussefiMechanical Engineering Dept. 1 Design Optimization Optimization is a component of design process The design of systems can be formulated as.
BEHAVIOUR OF MATERIALS
AE 1350 Lecture Notes #12. Topics to be Studied Importance of Structural Weight and Integrity Development of Aircraft Structures Elements of Aircraft.
New approaches to Materials Education - a course authored by Mike Ashby and David Cebon, Cambridge, UK, 2007 © MFA and DC 2007 UNIT 6. Objectives in conflict:
Stress and Strain – Axial Loading
Registered Electrical & Mechanical Engineer
MECHANICAL TESTING.
Subject: Composite Materials Science and Engineering Subject code:
Machine Design I (MCE-C 203) Mechatronics Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Fayoum University Dr. Ahmed Salah Abou Taleb Lecturer, Mechanical Engineering.
Mechanics of Materials II UET, Taxila Lecture No. (4&5)
Task 2.2 – Identification of most suitable face-sheets and optimization of panel properties Duration: month 1 to month 12 Partners involved: MOTULAB (WP.
NAZARIN B. NORDIN What you will learn: Strength, elesticity, ductility, malleability, brittleness, toughness, hardness Ferrous/ non-ferrous.
CTC / MTC 222 Strength of Materials Chapter 3 Design for Direct Stress.
Chapter 2 Properties of Metals.
Mechanical Properties of Materials
Stress Concentrations
MECH L# 10 Conflicting Objectives 1/30 MECH , Lecture 10 Objectives in Conflict: Trade-off Methods and Penalty Functions Textbook Chapters.
© MFA and DC 2007 New approaches to Materials Education - a course authored by Mike Ashby and David Cebon, Cambridge, UK, 2007 Unit 4. Ranking: refining.
Beam Design Beams are designed to safely support the design loads.
EGM 5653 Advanced Mechanics of Materials
PRESSURE VESSEL. 1.Determine the bursting steam pressure of a steel shell with diameter of 10 inches and made of ¼ in thick steel plate. The joint efficiency.
Progettazione di Materiali e Processi
Progettazione di Materiali e Processi
The Thick Walled Cylinder
Stress and Strain – Axial Loading
The Design Core DETAIL DESIGN A vast subject. We will concentrate on:
The Thick Walled Cylinder
Progettazione di Materiali e Processi
Chapter : 01 Simple Stresses
Progettazione di Materiali e Processi
Chapter 3 Mechanical Properties of Materials
Determination of Fracture Toughness
MATERIALS TESTING. Why are metals tested ? Ensure quality Test properties Prevent failure in use Make informed choices in using materials Factor of Safety.
Progettazione di Materiali e Processi
Elastic & Plastic behavior of Materials
Copyright ©2014 Pearson Education, All Rights Reserved
Presentation transcript:

Advanced Methods in Materials Selection Conflicting Constraints Lecture 9 & Tutorial 4 Conflicting Objectives Lecture 10 & Tutorial 5 MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints Lecture 9: Chapters 9 & 10 Conflicting constraints: “most restrictive constraint wins” Case study 1: Stiff / strong / light column Case study 2: Safe (no yield - no fracture)/ light air tank for a truck MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Multiple Constraints and Objectives Simplest case: Design with one objective, meeting a single constraint Design with multiple constraints • Design with multiple objectives Tie rod One Objective: one performance metric Rank by performance metric One Constraint Many Constraints Multiple Objectives: several performance metrics Penalty function method Rank by most restrictive performance metric Function Combination of methods One Objective: the performance metric Rank by performance metric One Constraint Many Constraints Multiple Objectives: several performance metrics Trade-off and value function method Rank by most restrictive performance metric Function Combination of methods Minimise mass Carry force F without yielding, given length Or several non-conflicting constraints, such as melting point, corrosion resistance, etc. MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

One notch up in complexity: Single objective / Conflicting Constraints Most designs are over-constrained: “Should not deflect more than something, must not fail by yielding, by fatigue, by fast-fracture …” more constraints than free variables One notch up in complexity: Single objective / Conflicting Constraints Tie rod Lecture 10 One Objective: one performance metric Rank by performance metric One Constraint Conflicting Constraints ConflictingConstraints Conflicting Objectives: conflicting performance metrics Penalty function method Rank by most restrictive performance metric Function Combination of methods Minimise mass No yield & Given deflection No corrosion Tmax > 100C. The most restrictive constraint determines the performance metric (mass) MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Q7.1. Materials for a stiff, light tie-rod Constraint # 1 Strong tie of length L and minimum mass L F Area A Tie-rod Function Length L is specified Must not stretch more than  Constraints m = mass A = area L = length  = density E= elastic modulus  = elastic deflection Equation for constraint on A:  = L = L/E = LF/AE (1) Minimise mass m: m = A L  (2) Objective Material choice Section area A Free variables Eliminate A in (2) using (1): Performance metric m1 Chose materials with largest M1 = MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Q7.1. Materials for a strong, light tie-rod Constraint # 2 Strong tie of length L and minimum mass L F Area A Tie-rod Function m = mass A = area L = length  = density = yield strength Length L is specified Must not fail under load F Constraints Equation for constraint on A: F/A < y (1) Eliminate A in (2) using (1): Minimise mass m: m = A L  (2) Objective (Goal) Material choice Section area A Free variables Performance metric m2 Chose materials with largest M2 = MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Q7.1: Conflicting Constraints: Strong /Stiff / Light Tie Rod Requires stiffer material Evaluate competing constraints and performance metrics: Max. deflection Must not yield = deflection y = yield strength E = elastic modulus Stiffness constraint Competing performance metrics Strength constraint Rank by the more restrictive of the two, meaning…? MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints Analytical solution in three steps: Rank by the more restrictive of the constraints 1. Calculate m1 and m2 for given L (1 m) and F (10 kN) 2. Find the largest of every pair of m’s 3. Find the smallest of the larger ones The most restrictive constraint requires a larger mass and thus becomes the controlling or active constraint. Cons to the analytical solution: Solution is not general, as it depends on F and L Lacks visual immediacy. MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Graphical version of the analytical solution (for Aluminium) /L= 1%: E constraint active (heavier) for long rods (rod stretches too much) mass /L= 1%: Strength constraint always active /L= 0.1%: y constraint active (heavier) for short rods Less demanding E constraint => thinner rod mE Solution for /L= 1% MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints length

MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints Cons to the analytical solution (slide #9) (more restrictive constraint) Solution is not general, as it depends on F and L Lacks visual immediacy. Pros to the graphical-analytical solution (Slide #10): it makes explicit the dependence on L and L/. Cons: it is specific to the material considered (requires a dedicated graph per material) => Graphical solution using indices and bubble charts: More general/powerful. Allows for a visual while physically based selection. Involves all available materials. Incorporates geometrical constraints through coupling factors. MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Graphical solution using Indices and Bubble charts M2 = M1 = This is what we know make m1 = m2 Solve for M1 Straight line, slope = 1 y-intcpt = L/ MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

E 7.1 Tie Rod Graphical solution (/L = 1% => L/ = 100) Use level 3, exclude ceramics m1 < m2 Simultaneously Maximise M1 and M2 m1 = m2 Coupling line for L/ = 100 m2 < m1 MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Active Constraint? 3-D view E7.1 Tie Rod Graphical solution ( /L = 0.1% => L/=1000) Use level 3, exclude ceramics Coupling line for L/ = 1000 Active Constraint? 3-D view Coupling line for L/ = 100 MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

3-D view of the interacting constraints m1 m1 > m2 m2 m2 > m1 m1 = m2 Locus of coupling line depends on coupling factor lighter m1 = m2 on the coupling line. The closer to the bottom corner, the lighter the component. Away from the coupling line, one of the constraints is active (larger m) MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Graphical solution (deflection = 1% L/=100) m1 < m2 lighter m1 = m2 Coupling line for L/ = 100 m2 < m1 MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Case Study # 2: Quite Similar to E7.2, Air cylinder for a truck Design goal: lighter, safe air cylinders for trucks Compressed air tank MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Case study: Air cylinder for truck Density  Yield strength y Fracture toughness K1c Pressure p Free variables Function Pressure vessel Objective Minimise mass Constraints Dimensions L, R, pressure p, given Safety: must not fail by yielding Safety: must not fail by fast fracture Must not corrode in water or oil Working temperature -50 to +1000C Wall thickness, t; choice of material Conflicting constraints lead to competing performance metrics MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Vol of material in cylinder wall Air cylinder for truck t L 2R Density  Yield strength y Fracture toughness K1c Pressure p What is the free variable? Aspect ratio,  Objective: mass Vol of material in cylinder wall Stress in cylinder wall Failure stress Safety factor Eliminate t transpose May be either y or f ! MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Air cylinder : graphical solution using CES charts CES Stage 1; apply simple (non conflicting) constraints: working temp up to 1000C, resist organic solvents etc. CES Stage 2: evaluate conflicting performance metrics: Must not yield: Must not fracture S = safety factor a = crack length y = yield strength K1c = Fracture toughness Competing performance metrics for minimum mass Equate m1 to m2, and find the coupling factor for given crack size a. MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Air cylinder - Simple (non- conflicting) constraints Corrosion resistance in organic solvents CES Stage 1: Impose constraints on corrosion in organic solvents Impose constraint on maximum working temperature Select above this line Max service temp = 373 K (1000C) Corrosion resistance MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints CES, Stage 2: Equate m1 to m2, and find the coupling factor for given crack size a. = = for a crack a = 5 mm, the coupling factor is 1/√(3.14*0.005) = 1/0.12 = 8 MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

Air cylinder - Conflicting constraints CES Stage 2: Find most restrictive constraint using Material Indices chart Air cylinder - Conflicting constraints a = 5 mm intcpt= 8 @ 1/M1= 1 Results so far: Epoxy/carbon fibre composites Epoxy/glass fibre composites Low alloy steels Titanium alloys Wrought aluminium alloy Wrought austenitic stainless steels Wrought precipitation hardened stainless steels Lighter this way Repeat for a = 5 μm MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints Summary Real designs are over-constrained and many have multiple objectives Method of maximum restrictiveness copes with conflicting multiple constraints Analytical method useful but depends on the particular conditions set and lacks the visual power of the graphical method Graphical method produces a more general solution Next lecture will solve air cylinder problem again for two conflicting objectives: e.g., weight and cost. MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints Solutions to E7.2 and E7.3 7.2 a Coupling factor = 253 for c= 5 µm; 7.2 b Coupling factor = 8 for c = 5 mm. 7.3 X- axis (E) multiplied by 1000 to convert GPa to MPa. 7.3a Coupling factor = 0.14 7.3b Coupling factor = 0.0014 OR: (0.14-1= 7.04) and (0.0014-1=704). MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints

MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints There is a typographical error in textbook, Exercise E7.2, p. 581, 8 lines from the bottom It reads: It should read: End of Lecture 9 MECH4301 2008 Lecture # 9 Conflicting Constraints