Sirris materials day 2011 systematic approaches to material selection and lightweighting - granta design

1,095 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,095
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
52
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sirris materials day 2011 systematic approaches to material selection and lightweighting - granta design

  1. 1. „Software-based systematic approaches to material selection and lightweighting‟ Sirris Materials Day 4th October 2011 - Ghent Dr Charles Bream www.grantadesign.com
  2. 2. Granta Design - IntroductionGranta Design – history • Founded in 1994 from the University of Cambridge  Professors Mike Ashby & David Cebon  Owners: Cambridge Univ, ASM International, Founders, Employees • Technology firsts include:  Materials selection (Ashby charts, performance indices…)  Integrated materials data management  Software-based teaching of materials engineeringThe materials information technology experts • Software – manage materials information, selection… • Data products – specialist materials data libraries • Services – implement, configure, apply…Customers • Airbus, Arcelor, Aubert & Duval, Boeing, Dow, Emerson, EADS Astrium, Ferrari, GE, Honeywell, IHI, J&J, Moen, NASA… • 800+ universities worldwide
  3. 3. Selection of Materials When? How?  Use previous or familiar material Design brief / requirements  Ask material supplier  Ask colleague or consultant  Development trials Preliminary design concept CAD CAD, CAE Detailed design Optimisation packages Implication of using wrong material: Prototype & testing  Suboptimal designIncreasing:  Non-competitive Time Effort Final design LCA  Extended development cycle Cost  Product recall
  4. 4. Systematic Material Selection All materials Breakdown design requirements into: Function – What does the component do? Constraints – What essential conditions must be met? Objectives – What is to be maximized or minimized? Free variable – What am I free to change? Screen on constraints - ‘Go’ / ‘no-go’ criteria (usually many) Rank on objectives - Ordering of materials that ‘go’ Top candidate materials Supporting information – Specialist databases, contact suppliers Local conditions – Preferred suppliers, process capability, location Final Selection
  5. 5. Train Floor ExampleDesign Requirements:Function:Self-supporting „Intermediate‟ floor for train carriage  Panel loaded in bending  Stiffness-limited design  Length, width specified  Thickness freeScreen on Constraints: • Temperature resistance (-40°C to +85°C) • Adequate toughness & strength • Durable to rain and salt water • Manufacture from flat sheet/profileRank on Objectives: • Minimize mass • Minimize cost
  6. 6. Ranking on Objectives• Minimize mass, cost… Minimize mass, cost…• Maximise performance per unit of performance Function & Each combination of: Loading Function Tie in tension Limiting Constraint Constraint Objective Panel in bending has a characteristic index Stiffness specified Objective Shaft in torsion Strength specified Minimum cost   M1    Fatigue limit Minimum weight EColumn in compression Geometry Max energy storage    ………. M2   1 3  E  ………. Minimum Mechanical, environmental impact Thermal, Electrical... ……….
  7. 7. Influence of Application on Material ChoiceLow weightTensile Strut  Index (m)    E Low alloy steel = 1 COMPOSITES METALS PLASTICS
  8. 8. Influence of Application on Material Choice Low weightPanel in Bending    Index (m)   1 3  E  Low alloy steel = 1 COMPOSITES METALS PLASTICS
  9. 9. Mass vs Cost trade-off Low weightPanel in Bending    Index (m)   1 3  E  Low alloy steel = 1  .C m  Index (c)   1 3  E 
  10. 10. Hybrid Materials & Structures?“A hybrid material is a combination of two or more materials in a pre-determined configuration and scale, optimally serving a specific engineering purpose” Kromm et al, 2002 Design variables:  Choice of materials  Volume fractions  Configuration  Connectivity  Scale
  11. 11. Optimization of Hybrid Materials All materials along line exhibit same value of the index: 1 E 3  quasi- Materials with the isotropic highest value arecomposite optimal for the application Influence of adding different reinforcement types and loading levels to a magnesium alloy Application = Lightweight stiff panel loaded in bending
  12. 12. Optimization of Hybrid Structures All materials along line exhibit same value of the index: 1 E 3  Materials with the highest value are optimal for the applicationOrange: Sandwich panel, Mg-50% carbon fibre skins & 50kg/m3Mg octet lattice core (Core thickness = 20mm, face sheet thickness = 0.05 – 5mm) Yellow: Predicted performance of core & skin materials
  13. 13. Summary Integration of material selection tools into typical design workflow CES Selector Design brief / requirements Eco Audit Tool Material Preliminary design concept CAD Selection Hybrid Synthesizer CAD, CAE Detailed design Optimisation packages • Evaluate different materials and Prototype & testing design concepts before committingIncreasing: expenditure Time Effort Final design LCA • Avoid problems associated with Cost incorrect material choice • Reduce development time
  14. 14. Thank You!

×