25 views

Uploaded by Ahmed M T

material science

save

- New Progress in R D of Basalt Fibres and BFRP in Infrastructure Engineering
- 1-s2.0-S0261306906002408-main
- February 2010 Vol. 32 No. 2
- design II
- Preparation and characterization of three-dimensional braided.pdf
- Adhesive joints
- 3D finite element modeling of chip formation and induced damage in machining Fiber reinforced composite
- Journal Papers
- 9thJapanInternationalSAMP_051110
- CES Tutorial 3 Derivation of Performance Indices (Feb 2014)
- 17 PMC poliester+piña_CURSO
- Fem Foundn1
- v074n08p312
- j.compstruct.2005.02.001
- 03_2D_beam
- polymers-06-00443-v2
- GeAR
- CHAP-1A
- Design of Rock Bolt and Shotcrete Support of Tunnel
- Manual aerial straps
- 1.1 - Introduction - Simple Stresses
- Lepljene Palice v Les
- Steering Knuckle
- Thesis IEEE Final
- New Kingsoft Writer Document
- Introduction to Composite Materials
- 1200150
- A design of gradient interphase reinforced by silanized graphene oxide and its effect on carbon fiber/epoxy interface
- Mina Mexico
- Technical Data Sheet for the HSV Stud Anchor Technical Information ASSET DOC 2331315
- Homework Analysis
- FEMath
- kjoberlander_28869
- Completion Mechanical
- Matlab Handouts
- Homework Anasys
- Aaa
- Homework Analysis
- urn
- 141_6.1_6.3
- ch02
- Thomson TheorVibrApplic 3rd Solman
- FE Mec CBT Specs With Ranges
- Exam1a.Fall02
- Lecture 03 Notes
- Press and Shrink Fits
- Hardness Report
- Ch03 Section13 Stress Concentration
- Mean Variance
- Hardness Report
- Machine Homeworks 1
- M3eSolns11
- e 59 Hardness Lab
- Chapter 1 Solutions
- Speech 13170
- HW_2
- Hardening
- M3eSolns10
- HW_5

You are on page 1of 10

1

C a s e S t u d y 1 ( C S 1 ) Materials Selection for a

Torsionally Stressed

Cylindrical Shaft

CS1.1 INTRODUCTION

Selection of the appropriate material is an important consideration in engineering

design; that is, for some application, choosing a material having a desirable or op-

timum property or combination of properties. Selection of the proper material can

reduce costs and improve performance. Elements of this materials selection process

involve deciding on the constraints of the problem and, from these, establishing

criteria that can be used in materials selection to maximize performance.

The component or structural element we have chosen to discuss is a solid cylin-

drical shaft that is subjected to a torsional stress. Strength of the shaft will be con-

sidered in detail, and criteria will be developed for maximizing strength with respect

to both minimum material mass and minimum cost. Other parameters and properties

that may be important in this selection process are also discussed briefly.

CS1.2 STRENGTH CONSIDERATIONS

For this portion of the design problem, we will establish a criterion for selection of

light and strong materials for the shaft. We will assume that the twisting moment

and length of the shaft are specified, whereas the radius (or cross-sectional area)

may be varied. We develop an expression for the mass of material required in terms

of twisting moment, shaft length, and density and strength of the material. Using

this expression, it will be possible to evaluate the performance—that is, maximize

the strength of the torsionally stressed shaft with respect to mass and, in addition,

relative to material cost.

Consider the cylindrical shaft of length Land radius r, as shown in Figure CS1.1.

The application of twisting moment (or torque) M

t

produces an angle of twist .

Shear stress at radius r is defined by the equation

(CS1.1)

Here, J is the polar moment of inertia, which for a solid cylinder is

(CS1.2) J ϭ

pr

4

2

t ϭ

M

t

r

J

Lear ni ng Obj ecti ves

After studying this case study, you should be able to do the following:

1. Briefly describe how the strength performance

index for a solid cylindrical shaft is determined.

2. Explain the manner in which materials selection

charts are employed in the materials selection

process.

3. Explain how factors such as a material’s cost,

stiffness, and fatigue behavior affect the

materials selection process.

ch01MaterialsSelectionforaTorsionallyStressedCylindricalShaft.qxd 6/18/10 4:45 PM Page 1

CS1.2 • Case Study 1 / Materials Selection for a Torsionally Stressed Cylindrical Shaft

r

L

M

t

Figure CS1.1 A solid cylindrical shaft that

experiences an angle of twist in response

to the application of a twisting moment M

t

.

Thus,

(CS1.3)

A safe design calls for the shaft to be able to sustain some twisting moment with-

out fracture. In order to establish a materials selection criterion for a light and strong

material, we replace the shear stress in Equation CS1.3 with the shear strength of

the material , divided by a factor of safety N, as

(CS1.4)

It is now necessary to take into consideration material mass. The mass m of any

given quantity of material is just the product of its density ( ) and volume. Since

the volume of a cylinder is just , then

(CS1.5)

or, the radius of the shaft in terms of its mass is just

(CS1.6)

Substituting this r expression into Equation CS1.4 leads to

(CS1.7)

Solving this expression for the mass m yields

(CS1.8)

The parameters on the right-hand side of this equation are grouped into three sets of

parentheses. Those contained within the first set (i.e., Nand M

t

) relate to the safe func-

tioning of the shaft. Within the second parentheses is L, a geometric parameter. Finally,

the material properties of density and strength are contained within the last set.

The upshot of Equation CS1.8 is that the best materials to be used for a light

shaft that can safely sustain a specified twisting moment are those having low

ratios. In terms of material suitability, it is sometimes preferable to work with what

is termed a performance index, P, which is just the reciprocal of this ratio; that is,

(CS1.9)

In this context, we want to use a material having a large performance index.

P ϭ

t

2

ր

3

f

r

r

ր

t

2

ր

3

f

m ϭ 12NM

t

2

2

ր

3

1p

1

ր

3

L2 a

r

t

2

ր

3

f

b

ϭ 2M

t

A

pL

3

r

3

m

3

t

f

N

ϭ

2M

t

pa

A

m

pLr

b

3

r ϭ

A

m

pLr

m ϭ pr

2

Lr

pr

2

L

r

t

f

N

ϭ

2M

t

pr

3

t

f

t ϭ

2M

t

pr

3

For a cylindrical

shaft of length L and

radius r that is

stressed in torsion,

expression for mass

in terms of density

and shear strength of

the shaft material

Strength performance

index expression for

a torsionally stressed

cylindrical shaft

ch01MaterialsSelectionforaTorsionallyStressedCylindricalShaft.qxd 6/18/10 4:45 PM Page 2

CS1.2 Strength Considerations • CS1.3

1

A comprehensive collection of these charts may be found in M. F. Ashby, Materials Selec-

tion in Mechanical Design, 3rd edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2005.

2

Strength for metals and polymers is taken as yield strength; for ceramics and glasses, com-

pressive strength; for elastomers, tear strength; and for composites, tensile failure strength.

At this point, it becomes necessary to examine the performance indices of a

variety of potential materials. This procedure is expedited by the use of materials

selection charts.

1

These are plots of the values of one material property versus those

of another property. Both axes are scaled logarithmically and usually span about

five orders of magnitude, so as to include the properties of virtually all materials.

For example, for our problem, the chart of interest is logarithm of strength versus

logarithm of density, which is shown in Figure CS1.2.

2

It may be noted on this plot

that materials of a particular type (e.g., woods, engineering polymers, etc.) cluster

together and are enclosed within an envelope delineated with a bold line. Sub-

classes within these clusters are enclosed using finer lines.

Now, taking the logarithm of both sides of Equation CS1.9 and rearranging

yields

(CS1.10)

This expression tells us that a plot of log versus log r will yield a family of straight

and parallel lines all having a slope of ; each line in the family corresponds to a dif-

ferent performance index, P. These lines are termed design guidelines, and four have

been included in Figure CS1.2 for P values of 3, 10, 30, and 100 (MPa)

2͞3

m

3

/Mg. All

materials that lie on one of these lines will perform equally well in terms of strength-

per-mass basis; materials whose positions lie above a particular line will have higher

performance indices, whereas those lying below will exhibit poorer performances. For

example, a material on the P 30 line will yield the same strength with one-third the

mass as another material that lies along the P 10 line.

The selection process now involves choosing one of these lines, a “selection

line” that includes some subset of these materials; for the sake of argument, let us

pick P ϭ 10 (MPa)

2͞3

m

3

/Mg, which is represented in Figure CS1.3. Materials lying

along this line or above it are in the “search region” of the diagram and are possi-

ble candidates for this rotating shaft. These include wood products, some plastics, a

number of engineering alloys, the engineering composites, and glasses and engi-

neering ceramics. On the basis of fracture toughness considerations, the engineer-

ing ceramics and glasses are ruled out as possibilities.

Let us now impose a further constraint on the problem—namely, that the

strength of the shaft must equal or exceed 300 MPa (43,500 psi). This may be rep-

resented on the materials selection chart by a horizontal line constructed at

300 MPa, Figure CS1.3. Now the search region is further restricted to the area above

both of these lines. Thus, all wood products, all engineering polymers, other engi-

neering alloys (viz., Mg and some Al alloys), and some engineering composites are

eliminated as candidates; steels, titanium alloys, high-strength aluminum alloys, and

the engineering composites remain as possibilities.

At this point, we are in a position to evaluate and compare the strength per-

formance behavior of specific materials. Table CS1.1 presents the density, strength,

and strength performance index for three engineering alloys and two engineering

composites, which were deemed acceptable candidates from the analysis using the

materials selection chart. In this table, strength was taken as 0.6 times the tensile

ϭ

ϭ

3

2

t

f

log t

f

ϭ

3

2

log r ϩ

3

2

log P

ch01MaterialsSelectionforaTorsionallyStressedCylindricalShaft.qxd 6/18/10 4:45 PM Page 3

CS1.4 • Case Study 1 / Materials Selection for a Torsionally Stressed Cylindrical Shaft

0.1 0.3 1 3 10 30

10,000

1000

100

10

1

0.1

Mg

Alloys

Ash

Si

Glasses

Density (Mg /m

3

)

Engineering

ceramics

Engineering

composites

Engineering

alloys

Porous

ceramics

Engineering

polymers

Woods

Elastomers

Polymer

foams

S

t

r

e

n

g

t

h

(

M

P

a

)

P = 100

P = 30

P = 10

P = 3

Diamond

Cermets

Sialons

B

MgO

Al

2

O

3

ZrO

2

Si

3

N

4

SiC

Ge

Nylons

PMMA

PS

PP

MEL

PVC

Epoxies

Polyesters

HDPE

PU

PTFE

Silicone

LDPE

Soft

Butyl

Wood

Products

Ash

Balsa

Balsa

Oak

Oak

Pine

Pine

Fir

Fir

Parallel

to Grain

Perpendicular

to Grain

Cork

Cement

Concrete

Engineering

alloys

KFRP

CFRP

Be

GFRP

Laminates

KFRP

Pottery

Ti

Alloys

Steels

W Alloys

Mo Alloys

Ni Alloys

Cu Alloys

Cast

Irons

Zn

Alloys

Stone,

Rock

Lead

Alloys

CFRP

GFRP

UNIPLY

Al Alloys

Figure CS1.2 Strength versus density materials selection chart. Design guidelines for

performance indices of 3, 10, 30, and 100 (MPa)

2͞3

m

3

/Mg have been constructed, all

having a slope of . (Adapted from M. F. Ashby, Materials Selection in Mechanical Design.

Copyright © 1992. Reprinted by permission of Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.)

3

2

yield strength (for the alloys) and 0.6 times the tensile strength (for the compos-

ites); these approximations were necessary because we are concerned with strength

in torsion, and torsional strengths are not readily available. Furthermore, for the

two engineering composites, it is assumed that the continuous and aligned glass

and carbon fibers are wound in a helical fashion (Figure 16.15 of Introduction; Fig-

ure 15.15 of Fundamentals), and at a 45° angle referenced to the shaft axis. The

five materials in Table CS1.1 are ranked according to strength performance index,

from highest to lowest: carbon fiber–reinforced and glass fiber–reinforced com-

posites, followed by aluminum, titanium, and 4340 steel alloys.

ch01MaterialsSelectionforaTorsionallyStressedCylindricalShaft.qxd 6/18/10 4:45 PM Page 4

Materials cost is another important consideration in the selection process. In

real-life engineering situations, the economics of the application is often the over-

riding issue and will normally dictate the material of choice. One way to deter-

mine materials cost is by taking the product of the price (on a per-unit mass basis)

and the required mass of material.

Cost considerations for these five remaining candidate materials—steel, aluminum,

and titanium alloys, and two engineering composites—are presented in Table CS1.2.

In the first column is tabulated . The next column lists the approximate relative

cost, denoted as ; this parameter is simply the per-unit mass cost of material c

r

ր

t

2

ր

3

f

CS1.2 Strength Considerations • CS1.5

Engineering

alloys

KFRP

CFRPBe

GFRP

Laminates

KFRP

Pottery

Mg

Alloys

Ti

Alloys

Steels

W Alloys

Mo Alloys

Ni Alloys

Cu Alloys

Cast

Irons

Zn

Alloys

Stone,

Rock

Al Alloys

Lead

Alloys

CFRP

GFRP

UNIPLY

10,000

1000

100

10

1

Glasses

Engineering

composites

Engineering

alloys

Porous

ceramics

Engineering

polymers

Woods

Elastomers

Polymer

foams

S

t

r

e

n

g

t

h

(

M

P

a

)

P = 10

Diamond

Cermets

Sialons

B

MgO

Al

2

O

3

ZrO

2

Si

3

N

4

SiC

Si

Ge

Nylons

PMMA

PS

PP

MEL

PVC

Epoxies

Polyesters

HDPE

PU

PTFE

Silicone

Cement

Concrete

LDPE

Soft

Butyl

Wood

Products

Ash

Ash

Balsa

Balsa

Oak

Oak

Pine

Pine

Fir

Fir

Parallel

to Grain

Perpendicular

to Grain

Cork

300 MPa

(MPa)

2/3

m

3

/Mg

0.1 0.3 1 3 10 30

0.1

Density (Mg /m

3

)

Engineering

ceramics

Figure CS1.3 Strength versus density materials selection chart. Materials within the

shaded region are acceptable candidates for a solid cylindrical shaft that has a mass-strength

performance index in excess of 10 (MPa)

2͞3

m

3

/Mg and a strength of at least 300 MPa

(43,500 psi). (Adapted from M. F. Ashby, Materials Selection in Mechanical Design.

Copyright © 1992. Reprinted by permission of Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.)

ch01MaterialsSelectionforaTorsionallyStressedCylindricalShaft.qxd 6/18/10 4:45 PM Page 5

CS1.6 • Case Study 1 / Materials Selection for a Torsionally Stressed Cylindrical Shaft

divided by the per-unit mass cost for low-carbon steel, one of the common engineering

materials. The underlying rationale for using is that although the price of a specific

material will vary over time, the price ratio between that material and another will

most likely change more slowly.

Finally, the right-hand column of Table CS1.2 shows the product of and .

This product provides a comparison of the materials on the basis of the cost of

materials for a cylindrical shaft that would not fracture in response to the twisting

moment M

t

. We use this product inasmuch as is proportional to the mass of

material required (Equation CS1.8) and is the relative cost on a per-unit mass basis.

Now the most economical is the 4340 steel, followed by the glass fiber–reinforced

composite, the carbon fiber–reinforced composite, 2024-T6 aluminum, and the tita-

nium alloy. Thus, when the issue of economics is considered, there is a significant

alteration within the ranking scheme. For example, inasmuch as the carbon

fiber–reinforced composite is relatively expensive, it is significantly less desirable;

in other words, the higher cost of this material may not outweigh the enhanced

strength it provides.

c

r

ր

t

2

ր

3

f

r

ր

t

2

ր

3

f

c

c

Table CS1.1 Density (), Strength (

f

), and Strength Performance Index (P)

for Five Engineering Materials

f

ր ϭ P

Material (Mgրm

3

) (MPa) [(MPa)

2/3

m

3

րMg]

Carbon fiber–reinforced composite

(0.65 fiber fraction)

a

1.5 1140 72.8

Glass fiber–reinforced composite

(0.65 fiber fraction)

a

2.0 1060 52.0

Aluminum alloy (2024-T6) 2.8 300 16.0

Titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V) 4.4 525 14.8

4340 Steel (oil-quenched and tempered) 7.8 780 10.9

a

The fibers in these composites are continuous, aligned, and wound in a helical fashion at a

45° angle relative to the shaft axis.

T

2

ր

3

f

Table CS1.2 Tabulation of the Ratio, Relative Cost ( ), and Product of and for

Five Engineering Materials

a

Material {10

؊2

[Mgր(MPa)

2/3

m

3

]} ($/$) {10

؊2

($/$)[Mg/(MPa)

2/3

m

3

]}

4340 Steel (oil-quenched and tempered) 9.2 3.0 27

Glass fiber–reinforced composite

(0.65 fiber fraction)

b

1.9 28.3 54

Carbon fiber–reinforced composite

(0.65 fiber fraction)

b

1.4 43.1 60

Aluminum alloy (2024-T6) 6.2 12.4 77

Titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V) 6.8 94.2 641

a

The relative cost is the ratio of the price per unit mass of the material and low-carbon steel.

b

The fibers in these composites are continuous, aligned, and wound in a helical fashion at a 45° angle relative to

the shaft axis.

c

1R/T

2/3

f

2 c R/T

2/3

f

c R/T

2

ր

3

f

c R/T

2

ր

3

f

ch01MaterialsSelectionforaTorsionallyStressedCylindricalShaft.qxd 6/18/10 4:45 PM Page 6

References • CS1.7

CS1.3 OTHER PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS

AND THE FINAL DECISION

To this point in our materials selection process, we have considered only the strength

of materials. Other properties relative to the performance of the cylindrical shaft may

be important—for example, stiffness, and, if the shaft rotates, fatigue behavior (Sec-

tions 8.7 and 8.8 of Introduction; Sections 9.9 and 9.10 of Fundamentals). Further-

more, fabrication costs should also be considered; in our analysis, they have been

neglected.

Relative to stiffness, a stiffness-to-mass performance analysis similar to the one

just discussed could be conducted. For this case, the stiffness performance index P

s

is

(CS1.11)

where G is the shear modulus. The appropriate materials selection chart (log G

versus log r) would be used in the preliminary selection process. Subsequently, per-

formance index and per-unit-mass cost data would be collected on specific candi-

date materials; from these analyses, the materials would be ranked on the basis of

stiffness performance and cost.

In deciding on the best material, it may be worthwhile to make a table employing

the results of the various criteria that were used. The tabulation would include, for

all candidate materials, performance index, cost, and so forth for each criterion, as

well as comments relative to any other important considerations. This table puts in

perspective the important issues and facilitates the final decision process.

SUMMARY

An expression for the strength performance index was derived for a torsionally stressed

cylindrical shaft; then, using the appropriate materials selection chart, a preliminary

candidate search was conducted. From the results of this search, several candidate en-

gineering materials were ranked on both strength-per-unit mass and cost bases. Other

factors that are relevant to the decision-making process were also discussed.

REFERENCES

P

s

ϭ

1G

r

Ashby, M. F., CES4 EduPack—Cambridge Engineer-

ing Selector, Granta Design Ltd., Cambridge,

UK, http://www.grantadesign.com.

Ashby, M. F., Materials Selection in Mechanical

Design, 3rd edition, Butterworth-Heinemann,

Oxford, 2005.

Ashby, M. F., and K. Johnson, Materials and Design,

Second Edition: The Art and Science of Material

Selection in Product Design, Butterworth-

Heinemann, Oxford, 2010.

Ashby, M. F., and D. R. H. Jones, Engineering

Materials 1: An Introduction to Their Properties

and Applications, 3rd edition, Butterworth-

Heinemann, Oxford, 2005.

Ashby, M. F., H. Shercliff, and D. Cebon, Materials

Engineering, Science, Processing and Design,

Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2007.

Budinski, K. G., and M. K. Budinski, Engineering

Materials: Properties and Selection, 9th edition,

Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ,

2010.

Dieter, G. E., and L. C. Schmidt, Engineering

Design: A Materials and Processing Approach,

4th edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2009.

Mangonon, P. L., The Principles of Materials Selec-

tion for Engineering Design, Pearson Prentice

Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1999.

ch01MaterialsSelectionforaTorsionallyStressedCylindricalShaft.qxd 6/18/10 4:45 PM Page 7

CS1.8 • Case Study 1 / Materials Selection for a Torsionally Stressed Cylindrical Shaft

DESI GN PROBLEMS

CS1.D1 (a) Using the procedure outlined in this

case study, ascertain which of the metal al-

loys listed in Appendix B (of Introduction

and Fundamentals) have torsional strength

performance indices greater than 10.0 (for

f

and r in units of MPa and g/cm

3

, respec-

tively) and, in addition, shear strengths

greater than 350 MPa.

(b) Also, using the cost database [Appendix

C (of Introduction and Fundamentals)], con-

duct a cost analysis in the same manner as in

the case study. For those materials that sat-

isfy the criteria noted in part (a), and on the

basis of this cost analysis, which material

would you select for a solid cylindrical shaft?

Why?

CS1.D2 Perform a stiffness-to-mass performance

analysis on a solid cylindrical shaft that is

subjected to a torsional stress. Use the

same engineering materials that are listed

in Table CS1.1. In addition, conduct a ma-

terial cost analysis. Rank these materials

on the basis of both mass of material re-

quired and material cost. For glass and

carbon fiber–reinforced composites, as-

sume that the shear moduli are 8.6 and 9.2

GPa, respectively.

CS1.D3 (a) A cylindrical cantilever beam is sub-

jected to a force F, as indicated in the

accompanying figure. Derive strength and

stiffness performance index expressions

analogous to Equations CS1.9 and CS1.11

for this beam. The stress imposed on the

unfixed end s is

(CS1.12)

L, r, and I are, respectively, the length,

radius, and moment of inertia of the beam.

Furthermore, the beam-end deflection d is

(CS1.13)

where E is the modulus of elasticity of the

beam.

(b) From the properties database pre-

sented in Appendix B (of Introduction

and Fundamentals), select the metal alloys

with stiffness performance indices greater

than 3.0 (for E and r in units of GPa and

g/cm

3

, respectively).

(c) Also, using the cost database [Appen-

dix C (of Introduction and Fundamentals)],

conduct a cost analysis in the same man-

ner as the case study. Relative to this analy-

sis and that in part (b), which alloy would

you select on a stiffness-per-mass basis?

(d) Now select the metal alloys with

strength performance indices greater than

14.0 (for s

y

and r in units of MPa and

g/cm

3

, respectively), and rank them from

highest to lowest P.

(e) Using the cost database, rank the ma-

terials in part (d) from least to most costly.

Relative to this analysis and that in part

(d), which alloy would you select on a

strength-per-mass basis?

(f) Which material would you select if

both stiffness and strength are to be con-

sidered relative to this application? Justify

your choice.

CS1.D4 (a) Using the expression developed for

stiffness performance index in Problem

CS1.D3(a) and data contained in Appen-

dix B (of Introduction and Fundamentals),

determine stiffness performance indices for

the following polymeric materials: high-

density polyethylene, polypropylene, poly

(vinyl chloride), polystyrene, polycarbonate,

d ϭ

FL

3

3EI

s ϭ

FLr

I

L

δ

r

F

ch01MaterialsSelectionforaTorsionallyStressedCylindricalShaft.qxd 6/18/10 4:45 PM Page 8

poly(methyl methacrylate), poly(ethylene

terephthalate), polytetrafluoroethylene,

and nylon 6,6. How do these values com-

pare with those of the metallic materials?

[Note: In Appendix B(of Introduction and

Fundamentals), where ranges of values are

given, use average values.]

(b) Now, using the cost database [Appen-

dix C(of Introduction and Fundamentals)],

conduct a cost analysis in the same man-

ner as the case study. Use cost data for the

raw forms of these polymers.

(c) Using the expression developed for

strength performance index in Problem

CS1.D3(a) and data contained in Appen-

dix B (of Introduction and Fundamentals),

determine strength performance indices

for these same polymeric materials.

CS1.D5 (a) A bar specimen having a square cross

section of edge length c is subjected to a

uniaxial tensile force F, as shown in the

accompanying figure. Derive strength and

stiffness performance index expressions

analogous to Equations CS1.9 and CS1.11

for this bar.

Design Problems • CS1.9

(c) Also, using the cost database [Appen-

dix C (of Introduction and Fundamen-

tals)], conduct a cost analysis in the same

manner as the case study. Relative to this

analysis and that in part (b), which alloy

would you select on a stiffness-per-mass

basis?

(d) Now select the metal alloys with

strength performance indices greater than

120 (for s

y

and r in units of MPa and

g/cm

3

, respectively), and rank them from

highest to lowest P.

(e) Using the cost database, rank the ma-

terials in part (d) from least to most costly.

Relative to this analysis and that in part

(d), which alloy would you select on a

strength-per-mass basis?

(f) Which material would you select if

both stiffness and strength are to be con-

sidered relative to this application? Jus-

tify your choice.

CS1.D6 Consider the plate shown in the accom-

panying figure, supported at its ends and

subjected to a force F that is uniformly

distributed over the upper face as indi-

cated. The deflection d at the L/2 position

is given by the expression

(CS1.14) d ϭ

5FL

3

32Ewt

3

(b) From the properties database pre-

sented in Appendix B (of Introduction

and Fundamentals), select the metal al-

loys with stiffness performance indices

greater than 26.0 (for E and r in units of

GPa and g/cm

3

, respectively).

F

L

c

c

F

L

F

␦

w

t

Furthermore, the tensile stress at the

underside and also at the L/2 location is

equal to

(CS1.15) s ϭ

3FL

4wt

2

ch01MaterialsSelectionforaTorsionallyStressedCylindricalShaft.qxd 6/18/10 4:45 PM Page 9

CS1.10 • Case Study 1 / Materials Selection for a Torsionally Stressed Cylindrical Shaft

analysis and that in part (b), which alloy

would you select on a stiffness-per-mass

basis?

(d) Now select the metal alloys with

strength performance indices greater than

5.0 (for s

y

and r in units of MPa and

g/cm

3

, respectively), and rank them from

highest to lowest P.

(e) Using the cost database, rank the ma-

terials in part (d) from least to most costly.

Relative to this analysis and that in part

(d), which alloy would you select on a

strength-per-mass basis?

(f) Which material would you select if

both stiffness and strength are to be con-

sidered relative to this application? Justify

your choice.

(a) Derive stiffness and strength per-

formance index expressions analogous to

Equations CS1.9 and CS1.11 for this

plate. (Hint: Solve for t in these two equa-

tions, and then substitute the resulting

expressions into the mass equation, as ex-

pressed in terms of density and plate

dimensions.)

(b) From the properties database in

Appendix B (of Introduction and Funda-

mentals), select the metal alloys with stiff-

ness performance indices greater than

1.40 (for E and r in units of GPa and

g/cm

3

, respectively).

(c) Also, using the cost database [Appen-

dix C (of Introduction and Fundamen-

tals)], conduct a cost analysis in the same

manner as the case study. Relative to this

ch01MaterialsSelectionforaTorsionallyStressedCylindricalShaft.qxd 6/18/10 4:45 PM Page 10

- New Progress in R D of Basalt Fibres and BFRP in Infrastructure EngineeringUploaded byClive Wong
- 1-s2.0-S0261306906002408-mainUploaded byJeyalal
- February 2010 Vol. 32 No. 2Uploaded byapi-26174564
- design IIUploaded byviveknarayan
- Preparation and characterization of three-dimensional braided.pdfUploaded bySiva Bhaskar
- Adhesive jointsUploaded byKeerthiChowdary
- 3D finite element modeling of chip formation and induced damage in machining Fiber reinforced compositeUploaded byAJER JOURNAL
- Journal PapersUploaded byDhileeban Sat
- 9thJapanInternationalSAMP_051110Uploaded byDharmesh Maniya
- CES Tutorial 3 Derivation of Performance Indices (Feb 2014)Uploaded byZamri Nasir
- 17 PMC poliester+piña_CURSOUploaded byGerson Vargas Herrera
- Fem Foundn1Uploaded bySuhas Natu
- v074n08p312Uploaded byAr Muttaqien
- j.compstruct.2005.02.001Uploaded byaman gupta
- 03_2D_beamUploaded byBakkiya Raj
- polymers-06-00443-v2Uploaded byPaul Hardin
- GeARUploaded bySoham De
- CHAP-1AUploaded bySeunghoJung
- Design of Rock Bolt and Shotcrete Support of TunnelUploaded byScott Downs
- Manual aerial strapsUploaded byFran Aguirre
- 1.1 - Introduction - Simple StressesUploaded byGelcie Maligaya
- Lepljene Palice v LesUploaded byBojan Preložnik
- Steering KnuckleUploaded byNithin
- Thesis IEEE FinalUploaded byNarayanan Kakkad
- New Kingsoft Writer DocumentUploaded byRing Master
- Introduction to Composite MaterialsUploaded byRamesh Santana
- 1200150Uploaded bysanjay Kumar
- A design of gradient interphase reinforced by silanized graphene oxide and its effect on carbon fiber/epoxy interfaceUploaded byKhusnul Khuluq
- Mina MexicoUploaded byrosarioponcetapia
- Technical Data Sheet for the HSV Stud Anchor Technical Information ASSET DOC 2331315Uploaded byserolo

- Homework AnalysisUploaded byAhmed M T
- FEMathUploaded byAhmed M T
- kjoberlander_28869Uploaded byAhmed M T
- Completion MechanicalUploaded byAhmed M T
- Matlab HandoutsUploaded byAhmed M T
- Homework AnasysUploaded byAhmed M T
- AaaUploaded byAhmed M T
- Homework AnalysisUploaded byAhmed M T
- urnUploaded byAhmed M T
- 141_6.1_6.3Uploaded byAhmed M T
- ch02Uploaded byAhmed M T
- Thomson TheorVibrApplic 3rd SolmanUploaded byAhmed M T
- FE Mec CBT Specs With RangesUploaded byAhmed M T
- Exam1a.Fall02Uploaded byAhmed M T
- Lecture 03 NotesUploaded byAhmed M T
- Press and Shrink FitsUploaded byAhmed M T
- Hardness ReportUploaded byAhmed M T
- Ch03 Section13 Stress ConcentrationUploaded byAhmed M T
- Mean VarianceUploaded byAhmed M T
- Hardness ReportUploaded byAhmed M T
- Machine Homeworks 1Uploaded byAhmed M T
- M3eSolns11Uploaded byAhmed M T
- e 59 Hardness LabUploaded byAhmed M T
- Chapter 1 SolutionsUploaded byAhmed M T
- Speech 13170Uploaded byAhmed M T
- HW_2Uploaded byAhmed M T
- HardeningUploaded byAhmed M T
- M3eSolns10Uploaded byAhmed M T
- HW_5Uploaded byAhmed M T