IE 560 Assignment 2 Comparison of Material Performance and Cost

Comparison of Specific Strength

Summary of Specific Strength values

S.No

Material

Specific Strength (kN*m/Kg)

Lower Limit

Upper Limit

1 Plain Carbon and Low Alloy Steels

26.9

207.7

2 Stainless Steel

26.3

170.1

3 Cast Irons

37.8

51.9

4 Aluminum Alloys

12.6

123.2

7.8

131.3

6 Magnesium Alloys

69.4

122.2

7 Titanium Alloys

37.8

250.7

5 Copper Alloys

8 Concrete

9 Glass1

5.2
26.9

10 Silicon Carbide1

192.3
159.0

11 Polymers

13.3

70.0

12 Composite Materials1

16.5

2222.22

187.0

218.0

13 Wood1

1. Ultimate Tensile Strength used for calculating Specific Strength for materials whose Yield Strength is not
specified.

Comparison of Specific Modulus

Summary of Specific Modulus values

S.No

Material Class

Specific Modulus (Gpa*cm3/Kg)

Lower Limit

Upper Limit

26.8

26.9

24.1

26.5

Plain Carbon and Low Alloy

Steels
Stainless Steel

Cast Irons

13.0

24.0

Aluminum Alloys

25.6

26.7

Copper Alloys

11.2

21.4

Magnesium Alloys

24.4

25.0

Titanium Alloys

22.9

25.9

Concrete

12.5

12.9

Glass

27.6

31.8

10

Silicon Carbide

90.6

92.4

11

Polymers

0.0

2.7

12

Composite Materials

4.1

100.0

13

Wood

21.0

24.0

Comparison of Cost/Load Bearing Capacity (henceforth called as CLB ratio)

Summary of Cost/Load Bearing Capacity values

S.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Material Class
Plain Carbon and Low Alloy
Steels
Stainless Steel
Cast Irons
Aluminum Alloys
Copper Alloys
Magnesium Alloys
Titanium Alloys
Concrete
Glass
Silicon Carbide
Polymers
Composite Materials
Wood

Cost/Yield Strength (103 USD/Kg*MPa)

Lower Limit
Upper Limit
2.62

5.19

6.9
1.35
19.2
28.8
30.4
108.43
0.04
29.7
75.5
22.22
0.75
5.55

20
1.65
261.76
124.14
50
276.47
1.02
181.15
471.7
1098.9
315.78
26.33

Plain carbon and low alloy steels with a cost to load bearing capacity of 2.62 to 5.19
(second best amongst metal alloys) and very good mechanical strength make it the most
widely used of all alloys. They are only preceded by cast iron in terms of cost to load
bearing capacity (1.35 to 1.65). However, the poor tensile strength and malleability of
cast iron fairly limits its usage. Alloy steels starting with a specific strength range from
26.9 to 207.7 find a wide variety of applications due to this exceptional range from heavy
load applications to industries where weight is an important consideration (use of high
strength steels). Their very good ductility and malleability also translates into lower
machining and manufacturing costs.2
Cast Irons as already discussed suffer from poor tensile strength. However, they have
very good compressive strength and vibration dampening properties. Therefore, they
find limited usage.
Stainless steels (CLB ratio range: 6.9 to 20) are not as widespread as carbon alloy
steels due to cost, but, with a specific strength range similar to carbon steels, substitute
carbon and low alloy steels in applications requiring high resistance to corrosion.
Aluminum alloys (CLB ratio range from 19.2 to 261.76) are the next most widely used
after ferrous alloys. Their very good specific strength makes them one of the most
preferred materials in applications where weight is an important consideration.
Magnesium alloys (CLB ratio range: 30.4 to 50) with its very low density has a very
good specific strength. However, their relatively high costs and low melting temperatures
limits its usage to applications requiring light weight construction.
Copper Alloys (CLB ratio range: 28.8 to 124.14) find limited usage in load bearing
applications due to their ordinary specific strength (barring Beryllium Copper), and are
mostly used for their exceptional thermal and electrical conductivity. Beryllium Copper

though has very good strength is exorbitantly priced (124.14 CB ratio) and is therefore
limited to niche areas (owing to its other properties like non-sparking, corrosion
resistance and maintaining structural integrity under high temperatures).
Titanium alloys with their exceptional specific strength (better even then steels) and
corrosion resistance make for very good materials for load bearing applications.
However, their very high CLB ratio (varying from 108.43 to 276.47) severely limits their

2. The underlined text also answers the question regarding reason for widespread usage of Plain carbon and alloy
steels.

usage to applications where weight is a consideration and harsh environmental

conditions exist (aircraft industry, surgical implants, petroleum and chemical industries).
Concrete has poor specific strength. However, with a very low CLB ratio of 1.02

and

very good compressive strength (and tensile strength as reinforced concrete) finds
application in construction industry (large volumes of concrete and using steel rods
offsets the disadvantage of having low specific strength).
Glasses with a CLB ratio ranging from 29.7 to 181.15 have a wide range of specific
strength from being as low as 26.9 for soda lime glass to 165.4 for chemically tempered
glass. However, brittleness of the material means it is not suitable for load bearing
applications.
Silicon Carbide has very good specific strength. However, a very high CLB ratio and
extreme brittleness means that is not used for load bearing applications. Instead, it is
mostly employed for its abrasive properties and in semiconductor electronics.
Polymers have low specific strength when compared to most of the steel alloys. Also,
their CLB ratio is much higher compared to ferrous alloys (22.22 to 1098.9) and is
therefore not widely used in load bearing applications.
Composite Materials exhibit the highest specific strength amongst all materials (for
Carbon, PAN precursor - Standard Modulus). However, they are also the most

exorbitantly and therefore, are used in applications where benefits from weight reduction
outweighs input cost or when cost consideration is secondary (aircraft industry, high
performance cars, etc.)
Wood with a CLB ratio ranging from 5.5 to 26.3 has a very good specific strength.
However, since wood has poor resistance to bending (load perpendicular to grain
orientation), its usage in load bearing applications is limited to construction industry.
Comparing the specific strength of materials, composites clearly outperform all other
materials thereby, they would present the highest possibility of weight reduction in
aircraft industry. They also have the highest stiffness which is very important for parts
that want high resistance to flexing. However, the exorbitant cost fairly limits is usage.
Also, these materials do not show any signs of failure before giving in. In aircraft
industry, visual inspection of key components is a vital aspect of preventive
maintenance. While metal alloys may show cracks before failing thereby giving the
Maintenance personnel a chance to catch the defect before failure, composites would
require more regular usage of sophisticated inspection techniques like ultrasonic or
acoustic testing. Titanium alloys have the best specific strength amongst discussed
metal alloys and therefore, offer the best possibility of weight reduction when comparing
metal alloys. Having higher temperature and corrosion resistance compared to Aluminum
and steels is also an added advantage. This also means that engine components and
skin panels may also be manufactured with titanium alloys. Aluminum alloys though not
as good as titanium alloys are relatively cheap and therefore the most used alloy. High
strength steel alloys and stainless steels even though have exceptional specific strength
are fairly limited in their usage due to high density. If we try to achieve weight reduction
through gauge reduction, flexing becomes an issue. Therefore, their usage is restricted
to areas where strength and hardness is extremely important like landing gear.

Parameters
Strength
Specific Strength
Density

Decreasing Order
Composites > High Strength Steel Alloys > Titanium Alloys >
Aluminum Alloys
Composites > Titanium alloys > High Strength Steel alloys >
Aluminum Alloys
Steel Alloys > Titanium Alloys > Aluminum Alloys > Composites

Cost to Load Bearing

Capacity

Composites > Titanium Alloys > Aluminum Alloys > High Strength
Steel Alloys

Ductility

Aluminum Alloys > Steel Alloys > Titanium Alloys >>> Composites

Aluminum alloys with their very good specific strength can be a good substitute of steel
for making the chassis. The skin panels of a cars body do not experience much load (e.g
hood, fender panels, door panels, roof) and therefore, can easily be substituted with
Aluminum alloy panels for attaining weight reduction. Low stress areas like the cowl,
inner door panels, floor of the underbody, side etc. that experience medium stress levels
can also use Aluminum without affecting the bodys structural integrity. However,
Aluminum wouldnt have adequate toughness for high stress areas like suspension and
engine mounts, frontal portion (critical for crash worthiness). Also, for achieving the
same strength as steels, a thicker gauge would be required which will make joining
process more problematic. High strength steels might be more suitable for such areas for
attaining weight reduction. Another problem would be the choice of joining process.
Currently, resistance spot welding is the most widespread practice in the industry.
However, Aluminum requires very high electric current for welding. Besides, presence of
oxide layer on Aluminum sheets drastically reduces the weldability of sheet panels.