 Material selection is a key step in design

process. It is as important as load and stress

analysis, and the design itself.

 There are over 40,000 useful metallic alloys

and about same number of non-metallic
engineering materials

 Material must enable part to perform specific

function at specific life and economically
suitable.

 Improperly chosen material can lead to

increased cost, poor service performance and
failure

1
 In material selection, the following principal
factors may be considered:

 1. Mechanical properties

 Stiffness :– Young’s modulus, shear modulus, etc

 Strength :– yield stress, tensile stress, etc
 Hardness :– Rockwell, Shore, etc
 Ductility :– elongation, etc
 Impact strength :– Charpy test, toughness, etc
 Fracture toughness :– KIC, GIC, etc
 Fatigue :– endurance limit, fatigue strength, etc
 Creep :– creep rate

 2. Composition and density

 3. Formability

 4. Surface treatment and coating

 Why?
• Increase surface hardness
• Wear resistance
• Corrosion resistance
• Decorative effect

 How?
• Electro deposited coating
• Ceramic/refractory coating
• Porcelain enamel coating, mechanical finishing like
sandblasted, engraved, wire brushed, buffed
• Paint coating

2
  5. Joinability

 Metallurgical processes
• Soldering
• Brazing
• Welding

 Mechanical methods
• Riveting, bolts and nuts, screws,
fasteners, etc

 Adhesive joining

 6. Cost

 Cost is most important criterion in

selecting a material in general.

 Factors need to be considered:

• Material cost
• Manufacturing cost
• Service cost (eg., maintenance)

 Experience and history of prior art may be

important, but may not give optimum solution
to present problem.

3
 Material Selection Process:

 1. Analysis of material requirements:

 Determine conditions of service and

environment that the product must
withstand

 2. Screening of candidate materials:

 Compare needed properties with a large

material property data base to select a
few materials that look promising for the
application

 3. Selection of candidate materials:

 Analyze candidate materials in terms of

performance, cost, fabricability to select
best materials for the application

 4. Development of design data:

 Determine experimentally key material

properties for selected material to obtain
reliable measures of material
performance under conditions expected
in service

4
 In other words:

 1. What do you want the material to do?

 Product dependent

 2. Which materials can do it?

 Knowledge dependent

 3. Which is the best material?

 Technique dependent

Making decision using decision matrix:

 Example: Lawn mower cover

5
Lawn Mowers (note shape of cover)

Automatic/
Robotic
lawn
mowers

6
 Requirements:

 1. Easily formed to required shape

 2. High impact strength
 3. Not too heavy
 4. Properly finished to prevent rust
 5. Cost to be less than functional part (like
motor)
 6. Easily secured to main frame; removable;
can withstand vibration

 Assume that 4 potential materials have

been chosen:

 1. Aluminium

 2. Mild steel

 3. Copper alloy

 4. Thermoset plastics

7
  Properties to be considered:
Weighing factor

 Mechanical properties (Mp) 0.3

 Composition and density (Cd) 0.0

 Formability (Fm) 0.2

 Joinability (Jn) 0.0

 Finishing and coating (Fc) 0.2

 Cost (high cost = low score) (Co) 0.3

Total = 1.0

Property Mp Fm Fc Co Sum
Weighing value 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 1.0
Aluminium 10 9 9 5
8.1
3.0 1.8 1.8 1.5
Sheet metal 10 8 7 8 8.4
3.0 1.6 1.4 2.4
Copper alloy 8 9 8 3
6.7
2.41.8 1.6 0.9
Thermo plastic 3 10 10 10 7.9
0.9 2.0 2.0 3.0
Rating factor / (weighing factor x rating factor) High cost means low score
Weighing factor = measure of relative importance of properties (total = 1)
Rating factor = ability to measure up to the desired property (0 to 10)

8
  Conclusion :

 Mild steel is the best material for the

lawn mower cover

 Sum = 8.4 is highest

Material selection by Weighted Property

Index (Material Performance Index):
 Weighted property index, g, is obtained by
multiplying the property value, b, by the
weighting factor, Wi.

 Each property is so scaled that the largest

value does not exceed 100.

b = Scaled property

Numerical value of property

= x 100
Largest value under consideration

9
  For properties that are more desirable to
have low values, eg., density, corrosion
loss, cost, electrical resistance, etc.,
scale factor my be:

b = Scaled property

Lowest value under consideration

= x 100
Numerical value of property

Example:
Mat’l sys $/kg b, sys b, cost
A 350 12 (350/560)x100 (11/12)x100
= 62.5 = 91.6
B 420 15 (420/560)x100 (11/15)x100
= 75.0 = 73.3
C 560 15 (560/560)x100 (11/15)x100
= 100 = 73.3
D 450 17 (450/560)x100 (11/17)x100
= 80.4 = 64.7
E 290 11 (290/560)x100 (11/11)x100
= 51.8 = 100

10
  For properties that are not readily expressed
in numerical value, eg., weldability, etc, some
kind of subjective rating may be required

 Example:

Property Mat’l A Mat’l B Mat’l C Mat’l D

Weldability Excellent Good Good Fair
Relative 5 3 3 1
rating
Scaled 100 60 60 20
property

 For weighing factor, Wi:

 Properties are compared two at a time.

 Total number of possible conditions is:

N = n(n-1) / 2 where n = number of

properties considered.

 If total number of positive decision for each

property is m, then Wi = mi / N

 Material performance index,

11
 Example:
 Material for a cryogenic storage vessel for
liquefied propane gas (-189.90C) is being
evaluated on basis of:

 1. Low-temperature fracture toughness

 2. Fatigue strength

 3. Stiffness

 4. Thermal expansion

 5. cost

 Note: N = 5(5-1)/2 = 10 possible

comparisons of pairs

Examples of
cryogenic
storage
vessels

12
 Possible design combinations:

1 2 3 4 5 6
Property (1)(2) (1)(3) (1)(4) (1)(5) (2)(3) (2)(4)
1. Fracture
1 1 1 1
toughness
2. Fatigue
strength 0 0 1
3. Stiffness 0 1
4. Thermal
0 0
expansion
5. Cost 0

Possible design combinations:

7 8 9 10 Positive Weighting
Property (2)(5) (3)(4) (3)(5) (4)(5) decision factor
1. Fracture
4 0.4
toughness
2. Fatigue
strength 0 1 0.1
3. Stiffness 0 0 1 0.1
4. Thermal
1 0 1 0.1
expansion
5. Cost 1 1 1 3 0.3
10 1.0

13
 Weighted property index chart:
Go-no-go screening

304
stain-
less
9% Ni
steel
Al
alloy
3% Ni
steel

Weighted property index chart:

Go-no-go screening

304 S S S
stain-
less
9% Ni S S S
steel
Al S S U
alloy
3% Ni S S S
steel
S = satisfactory; U = unsatisfactory

14
 Weighted property index chart:
Go-no-go screening

304 S S S 100 70 93 80 50 79
stain-
less
9% Ni S S S 85 100 97 100 83 89
steel
Al S S U - - - - - -
alloy
3% Ni S S S 40 70 100 94 100
steel
72
S = satisfactory; U = unsatisfactory

 Conclusion :

 Material performance index indicates

that 9% Nickel steel is best choice for
this application.

 Index, g = 89 is highest

15