## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Hesham A. Hegazi+, Tarek M. El-Hossainy* Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, The American University in Cairo (AUC), Cairo 11511, EGYPT

+

**Email: hhegazi@aucegypt.edu
**

*Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical Design & Production Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, 12316, EGYPT

Email: telhossainy@hotmail.com

Abstract Material selection process constitutes a high level of vagueness and imprecision. Selected material must fulfil the machining requirements as well as application needs. Due to the lack of complete information, uncertainty, and imprecision for material selection in such applications, a technique to perform selection calculations on imprecise representations of parameters is presented. This technique is based on fuzzy logic using fuzzy sets. Different materials alternatives are expressed in terms of fuzzy orders of magnitude. Calculations based on fuzzy weighted average are performed to produce the ratings among selected material alternatives. This technique is applied for the different alternatives based on the manufacturing requirements and the application requirements. At the end, the third fuzzy decision making process that combines the highest attribute’s important for both manufacturing and application requirements is presented. According to a predefined goal, materials are classified depending on the nearest to this goal.

1. Introduction The product material selection is affected by two basic aspects, machining and its associated parameters and the required product technical specifications needed in the market. Much of the decision-making in the real world takes place in an environment in which the goals, the constraints and the consequences of possible actions are not known precisely. Fuzzy analysis should be introduced to product development so that decision-making in difficult situations is eased and product cost and quality are improved while time-to-market is shortened. The procedure of evaluating of multiple attributes was investigated by many researchers in the last and present decades [1, 2]. Many researchers worked on improving the decision making process, especially in design, material selection and manufacturing. Evaluation of preliminary designs is often necessary when the design alternative is only in the roughest “concept” stage [3]. The underlying power of fuzzy set theory is that it uses linguistic variables, rather than quantitative variables, to represent imprecise concepts [4]. The imprecision in fuzzy models is therefore generally quite high.

consumer needs are more personal and diversified. Utility analysis may be used in later stages of preliminary design. They concluded that using improved fuzzy reform optimization method. Chen [6] used calculations based on fuzzy weighted average to produce the ratings among design alternatives. where numerical qualification of attribute levels is possible. a qualitative linguistic description of a desired bearing is used as weights in the fuzzy weighted average algorithm. as his strategy and action are based on intuition and experience. The model has been applied to data extracted from Machining Data Handbook and a very good correlation was obtained between the handbook data and that predicted using the fuzzy logic model. The fuzzy weighted average technique is used to perform these calculations. The problem was the selection of the best bearings for a specific problem. He added that the relationship between a given material hardness and the recommended cutting speed can be described and evaluated by the fuzzy sets.El Baradie [5] described the development stages of a fuzzy logic model for metal cutting. through the use of . enterprise production is more flexible. and can be described and evaluated by the theory of fuzzy sets. low cost. reasonable price and good service that is because it can assign right task to right person in right time for shortening development time of product. He demonstrated his method in the bearing selection case study where imprecise linguistic description of the design problem in a manner similar to human language can be accommodated. while supporting an overhanging vertical point load. the production cycle period of traditional manufacturing industry is long. He ended that the fuzzy logic model proposed suggests the possibility of establishing the strategy of machining data selection for a specific machining process. Wood et al. Zhao et al. [8] developed a technique to perform design calculations on imprecise representations of parameters. using fuzzy calculus. In his implementation. attached to a wall at one end. [7] mentioned that with the increasing of global market competition and dynamic change of market environment. enterprise can develop product rapidly to satisfy consumer requirements and have high quality. They demonstrated and compared two techniques: fuzzy set analysis and multi-attribute utility analysis. They demonstrated the technique using a simple mechanical design example. He concluded that the strategy and action of the skilled machine tool operator when selecting the cutting speed and feed rate for a given material can be described by the theory of fuzzy sets. delivering goods is not in time. products are not met the requirements of market and lack of market competition ability. [4] developed a procedure for the evaluation of multiple attributes in the preliminary design stage. The problem of preliminary material selection for an automobile bumper beam was analysed to illustrate the application of both analytical procedures. Thruston et al. The evaluation of alternatives in fuzzy numbers was ranked according to preferability. product quality is not good and resource are not used in reason. At present. The problem was to design a mechanical structure. Because of the phenomena. They recommended the use of fuzzy analysis in the earliest stage of preliminary design evaluations. Additional useful information that this method can provide. His model is based on the assumption that the relationship between the hardness of a given material and the recommended cutting speed is imprecise.

was the coupling between imprecise representations of design parameters (inputs) and the performance parameter results. what are the corresponding material classes. He represented a material selection substitution system that is used as a part of a larger case-based design environment. This could improve the production performance and the product life cycle. 11]: μF(u) = ⎨ ⎧1 ⎩0 iff iff u ∈F u ∉F (1) (Note that. Koning [9] concentrated on two types of material-related reasoning that occur in engineering design: selection and substitution. Fuzzy Analysis and Computations The nature of uncertainty in a problem is a very important point that engineers should ponder prior to their selection of an appropriate method to express the uncertainty. what is the range of possible material property. 2.the γ-level measure. The material selection system helps the designer to adapt previous designs by suggesting material substitutions that better suit the target application. ‘iff’ is short for ‘if and only if’. The membership function μF of a fuzzy set F is a function μF : U → [0. Fuzzy sets provide a mathematical way to represent vagueness in humanistic systems [5]. 1] instead from the two-element set {0. 1}. 2. The fuzzy sets based representation in his system supported the following types of queries to the material knowledge base: 1) given a material class.1 Fundamentals For a classic set U whose generic elements are denoted u. The selected material should meet in globally both the production requirements and the market needs. membership in a classic subset F of U is often viewed as a characteristic function μF such that[5. The purpose of the paper is the implementation of the fuzzy theory in the selection from material alternatives according to manufacturing and application requirements. 2) given an order of magnitude of a material property.) The characteristic function is generalized to a membership function that assigns to every u ∈ U a value from the unit interval [0. The fuzzy analysis should take place to select one or two best materials which could identify as a possible solution for a decision making process and eventually the product development can be significantly improved. 1] (2) . 10.

the set F could be defined as a tabulation of its membership function at each u ∈ U: F = {(1. et al. (9..2 Fuzzy Analysis The extension principle defines a fuzzy set C and its membership function induced by a real function y = f(x1. (13... [12] and illustrated its application when the function y = f(x1. 1]...xr {min[ μ( x1 )..So.. 0. (25..... (8.. .. bi]. xr.. where αi = (i .. The fuzzy weighted average (FWA) algorithm developed by Dong. . Thus the definition of μ C ( y ) requires the solution of a maximization problem for each value of y defined by f(x1.1)/(n ... we will write F = ∫ μF(u) / u U (7) 2. 0)} where (4) F = μF(u1) / u1 + .9). μ( x2 ).... 0. 0.μ( xr )] } (8) where “sup” refers to the supremum achieved by choice of x1..0).. 8................ μF(u)) : u ∈ U} For example..r μC( y ) μ ( xi ) .. every element u from U has a membership degree determined by the set of tuples: μF ∈ [0. i= 1.+ μF(un) / un = i =1 ∑ μ F (ui ) / ui n (5) Any countable or discrete universe U allows a notation F= u∈ U ∑ μF(u) / u (6) but when U is uncountable or continuous. 13. xr). 0.5). with membership function i = 1. .. 1.. xr) is .2).5). xr) and the fuzzy sets Bi .. If U = {1. 5. considering the fuzzy set F as “number close to 9”...... Membership functions for fuzzy numbers can be approximated using a number of α-cuts which are a set of n intervals [ai.n over which μ(x) ≥ αi for ai < x < bi. F is completely (3) F = {(u.. . μ C ( y ) = supx1 ..1). (5.. 25}...

Real variables can be used to express the weights and ratings by means of a figure of merit. For k = 1: . instead of functions with curves. Table A1 shows the properties of the selected materials..” in relation to other alternatives. It might be claimed that the rules used to describe fuzziness graphically are also fuzzy[5]. one approach is to use a rating which describes the desired levels of the attributes and further to attach weights to the ratings according to the importance of those attributes. Table A2 in Appendix (A) shows the main characteristics of these materials.. 6] as shown in Figure 1. Seven levels will be used: very low (VL). It is usual to have functions with straight lines. If the weight for the jth attribute is wi. generally following the approach given by [4. 3.. production rate.. and machining accuracy. U 2 = L . These attributes will be evaluated for six candidates’ materials. and to rank the alternatives accordingly.2 . it would be natural to compute the weighted averages.. 6]: ri = ∑ w j rij j =1 k i = 1. On the other hand. High. and the rating for the jth attribute of the ith alternative is rij.. the designer might easily be able to describe the attributes of an alternative as “Very High. All attributes may assume a fuzzy value as defined in Table 1. ri... middle (M). surface roughness.. middle to high (MH). Low.. U7} where ~ ~ ~ U 1 = VL . while Table A3 summarizes the general applications of these materials. low to middle (ML).. But the shapes used to describe the fuzziness have few restrictions indeed. Then the universe of discourse U will be expressed as the finite set of fuzzy numbers U = { U1... Membership functions characterize the fuzziness in a fuzzy set-whether the elements in the set are discrete or continuous. and a fuzzy rating will be calculated from Eq. 10. for a variable (x) ranging from 0 to 1. by the following equation [4.I (10) for each alternative. production cost.in a graphical form for eventual use in the mathematical formalism of fuzzy set theory. tool life... which gives the summary of the fuzzy number assignments... high (H). Selection Method Based on Manufacturing Requirements The selection process considers six attributes: power consumed.. . and very high (VH).. low (L). U2.y= ∑ wi xi i =1 n n ∑ wi i =1 (9) In describing a design alternative. The membership functions will be defined as a triangular in shape.U 7 = VH .

and machining accuracy. Q & T Alloy Steel VH L MH M VH H AISI 4140. 4.4% C. M: Middle. production cost. the designer needs to specify the requirements for the power consumed. H: High. MH: Middle to High. 0. Table 2: Fuzzy descriptions of the goal based on manufacturing requirements. surface roughness. Criteria Alternatives Power Consumed Tool life Surface Roughness Production Rate Production Cost Machining Accuracy Carbon Steel H ML H M H H AISI 1050. The levels of the attributes of each alternative are described . 3.54% C. Q & T Gray Cast Iron MH ML VH L MH L ASTM Class 60 Aluminium Bronze L M L VH ML M Heat Treated Tin Bronze VL H VL VH L M Chill Cast Aluminium L M VL VH ML MH 2024 T4 VL: Very Low. production rate. 6 ⎧ 0 1 − 6x x ≤ 0 or x ≥1/ 6 0 ≤ x≤1 / 6 ⎧ ⎪ μUk ( x ) = ⎨ ⎪ ⎩ and for k = 7: 0 6x − ( k − 2 ) k − 6x x ≤ (k − 2) / 6 or x≥k / 6 ( k − 2 ) / 6 ≤ x ≤ ( k − 1) / 6 ( k − 1) / 6 ≤ x ≤ k / 6 x ≥1 μ U7 ( x ) = ⎨ ⎩ ⎧ x ≤ 5 / 6 or 0 6x − 5 5 / 6 ≤ x ≤ 1 (11) Table 1: Fuzzy description of attributes based on manufacturing requirements. 5. L: Low. tool life.μ U1 ( x ) = ⎨ ⎩ for k = 2. Criteria Power Consumed Tool life Surface Roughness Production Rate Production Cost Machining Accuracy Importance Goal M VL ML VH H VL L VH H VL VH VH When starting a new design. and VH: Very High. ML: Low to Middle. 0.

although the algebra can become tedious [4]. U(re): ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ 30 54 82 U(rGoal): ⎛ . ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎛ 14 39 76 ⎞ ⎜ . the importance of each alternative is weighted using the same universe of discourse as shown in Table 2. and a fuzzy rating will be calculated from Eq. High.. in addition. The membership functions of the fuzzy rating ri can now be computed for each alternative material. ⎟. the membership functions for the alternative ratings are respectively represented by the triplets: 61 102 149 62 103 140 ⎞ ⎛ 39 73 111 ⎞ U(ra): ⎛ . specific gravity. followed by Tin Bronze Chill Cast. fatigue resistance. 4. the importance of each alternative is weighted . The exact value of membership functions are given in equation (B5. . ⎟ .. Selection Method Based on Application Requirements In case of considering the application requirements. followed by Carbon Steel AISI 1050 Q & T. B7). from the extended fuzzy number multiplication and summation. After evaluation. U(rc): ⎜ . These attributes will be evaluated for six candidates’ materials. 10. the designer might easily be able to describe the attributes of an alternative as “Very High. and corrosion resistance. in addition. and (B7) would be extremely close and more than adequate for the comparison of alternatives [6]. the selection process considers six attributes: material cost. The idea of selecting the best alternative is based on finding the alternative which is closed to a fuzzy goal. followed by Gray Cast Iron ASTM Class 60. the exact computation is straight forward. Low. .” in relation to other alternatives. . ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ (12) The approximate triangular plot of the membership functions is given in Figure 2. so it is the preferable choice which ranked first by the fuzzy scheme. ⎞ . . U(rf): ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎛ 21 49 86 ⎞ ⎜ . Since all of the membership functions of the fuzzy numbers are triangular. ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ .using the set of fuzzy numbers given above. wear resistance. A triangular approximation of the equation (B5). The Aluminium Bronze Heat Treated ranked second. . ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ 16 48 86 U(rd): ⎛ . then the Alloy Steel AISI 4140 Q & T. which gives the summary of the fuzzy number assignments. The membership functions for the fuzzy rating readily indicates that the Aluminium 2024 T4 alternative is the closed to the goal. and it is only for the first alternative of Carbon Steel AISI 1050 Q & T. The levels of the attributes of each alternative are described using the set of fuzzy numbers given above. . The description of the fuzzy goal is shown in Table 2. .. U(rb): ⎛ . heat resistance. ⎞ . the computations for the other alternatives can be done in the same manner as described in Appendix (B). All attributes may assume a fuzzy value as defined in Table 3. On the other hand.

using the same universe of discourse as shown in Table 4. ⎞ . ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ (13) . ⎟ . H: High. ⎞ . U(rb): ⎛ . the membership functions for the alternative ratings are respectively represented by the triplets: 61 105 146 82 132 171 45 83 122 U(ra): ⎛ . The description of the fuzzy goal is shown in Table 4. . 0. Q & T Gray Cast Iron L H MH H L ASTM Class 60 Aluminium Bronze VH M M VH MH Heat Treated Tin Bronze VH L M VH MH Chill Cast Aluminium H L VL VL L 2024 T4 VL: Very Low. ⎞ .4% C. The idea of selecting the best alternative is based on finding the alternative which is closed to a fuzzy goal. . Table 3: Fuzzy description of attributes based on application requirements. . ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ 61 108 146 U(rd): ⎛ . Criteria Alternatives Material Cost Wear Resistance Heat Resistance Specific Gravity Fatigue Resistance Corrosion Resistance Carbon Steel M MH H VH MH AISI 1050. . After evaluation.54% C. ⎟. . M: Middle. . U(rc): ⎛ . 0. Q & T Alloy Steel H H VH VH H AISI 4140. MH: Middle to High. ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎛ 51 96 134 ⎞ ⎜ . U(rf): ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎛ 20 44 84 ⎞ ⎜ . and (A7) would be extremely close and more than adequate for the comparison of alternatives[6]. Criteria Material Cost Wear Resistance Heat Resistance Specific Gravity Fatigue Resistance Corrosion Resistance Importance Goal H VL VH VH VH VH M VL M VH ML VH A triangular approximation of the equation (A5). and VH: Very High. . ML: Low to Middle. U(re): ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ 65 102 124 U(rGoal): ⎛ . M MH M VH VH H Table 4: Fuzzy descriptions of the goal based on application requirements. L: Low.

the selection process considers the highest importance.54% C.The approximate triangular plot of the membership functions is given in Figure 3. so it is the preferable choice which ranked first by the fuzzy scheme. The membership functions for the fuzzy rating readily indicates that the Carbon Steel AISI 1050 Q & T alternative is the closed to the goal. In case of the manufacturing requirements. 0. Both Aluminium Bronze Heat Treated and Tin Bronze Chill Cast ranked second. followed by Alloy Steel AISI 4140 Q & T. Table 5: Fuzzy description of attributes based on manufacturing and application requirements. then Aluminium 2024 T4. Selection Method Based on Manufacturing and Application Requirements In case of considering both manufacturing and application requirements. The new combined decision matrix Table 5 shows the selected six attributes based on the above selection criteria. while wear resistance and heat resistance are ranked very high. surface roughness. and production cost are ranked high. 5. Q & T Alloy Steel AISI 4140. In case of application requirements. material cost is ranked high.4% C. 0. while machining accuracy is raked very high. followed by Gray Cast Iron ASTM Class 60. Criteria Alternatives Surface Roughness Production Cost Machinin g Accuracy Material Cost Wear Resistance Heat Resistance Carbon Steel AISI 1050. Q & T Gray Cast Iron ASTM Class 60 Aluminium Bronze Heat Treated Tin Bronze Chill Cast Aluminium 2024 T4 H H H M MH H MH VH H H H VH VH L VL VL MH ML L ML L M M MH L VH VH H H M L L MH M M VL . Table 6 shows the importance of each attribute and a goal considered as a reference for this combined selection.

Criteria Surface Roughness Production Cost Machinin g Accuracy Material Cost Wear Resistance Heat Resistance Importance Goal H VL MH VL VH VH ML VL H VH M VH After evaluation. a qualitative linguistic description of a desired material type is used as weights in the fuzzy weighted average algorithm. ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ (14) The approximate triangular plot of the membership functions is given in Figure 4.Table 6: Fuzzy descriptions of the goal based on manufacturing and application requirements. U(rb): ⎛ . . ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎛ 19 48 86 ⎞ ⎜ . followed by Aluminium 2024 T4. . so it is the preferable choice which ranked first by the fuzzy scheme. cams. followed by Tin Bronze Chill Cast. . The Aluminium Bronze Heat Treated ranked second. In the implementation. . The application of the fuzzy theory was practically applied to the selection of the proper material among six attributes depending on manufacturing and application requirements. manufacturing processes and different alternative materials. ⎞ . .. ⎞ . The output ranked materials in this case study can be the optimum decision of selecting materials for general engineering products such as gears. ⎞ . Based on each requirement and the defined goal. Similar analysis can be implemented for different applications. U(re): ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ 55 84 110 U(rGoal): ⎛ . The membership functions for the fuzzy rating readily indicates that the Gray Cast Iron ASTM Class 60 alternative is the closed to the goal. ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ 30 67 109 U(rd): ⎛ . A combined attributes is defined based on the highest and the very highest importance in both manufacturing and application requirements. then Alloy Steel AISI 4140 Q & T. followed by Carbon Steel AISI 1050 Q & T. . the membership functions for the alternative ratings are respectively represented by the triplets: 70 116 168 51 91 135 77 127 174 U(ra): ⎛ . Conclusion This paper has detailed the implementation of fuzzy rating in the process of material selection when considering manufacturing and application. attributes are ranked with respect to the goal. pulleys.. ⎟ . 7. etc. . shafts. . U(rc): ⎛ . ⎟. It gives a simple and strong way for the selection of an alternative when the attributes are imprecise. U(rf): ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎝ 36 36 36 ⎠ ⎛ 22 47 85 ⎞ ⎜ .

Ross T.. 4.” Concurrent Engg. 1995. Hegazi H. Macmillan Publishing Co... 1995. McGraw-Hill Inc. USA. 679-692. A. Proceeding of the Design Automation Conf. “Fuzzy Logic With Engineering Applications”. “A Survey of Design Philosophies. of Engineering Manufacture 210. “A Fuzzy Logic Model For Machining Data Selection”. pp. H. 2002..R. pp. “An Introduction to Fuzzy Control”. Show. L. V. 183-199.. Oxford University Press. 15. K. J. J. Int. Evbuomwan N F O. “Fuzzy Reform and Optimization of Design Task in Concurrent Engineering”. IMechE. 18. Paper No. pp. Chen Y. 16...D. A. Machinability Data Centre Metcut Research Associates Inc. Zhao. Mechanisms. “Basic Machining Reference Handbook”. New York.S. 9. “Computations With Imprecise Parameters in Engineering Design: Background and Theory. New York.. Reinfrank M.E. “Design for Manufacturability Handbook”.” Fuzzy Sets and System 21. Vol. 1999.” Trans. 114. “Design Decision-Making in the Early Stages of Collaborative Engineering”.. Antonsson E. 1353-1372. Wood K. 5. “A Fuzzy Approach to Material Selection in Mechanical Design. K.. 2005. Kimura. Meyers.. 8. Driankov D. Cairo University..” Trans. Zhang. . Osman T. ASME.. “A Fuzzy Approach for the Selection of Power Trasmission Systems in the Preliminary Design Stage”.” Proc. McGraw-Hill. “Machine Elements in Mechanical Design”. Michels. 1989. 1996. 1999... Inc. J. “Fuzzy Ratings in Mechanical Engineering Design--Application to Bearing Selection. DETC2002/DAC-34034. 12. A. Paper No. pp. pp. Models.. DETC2001/DAC-21158. Wilson. 2004. Sivaloganathan S. “Machining Data Handbook”. M. Des. El Baradie M. Inc. 1988. Bralla. and Systems. Tools Manufact. Grote... Slattery. Cincinnati. “Fuzzy Weighted Averages and Implementation of the Extension Principle... 2001.G. No. 3. 11. J. W. 4.C. 6. C. R. Proceeding of the Design Automation Conf. and Automn in Des. 1975. Jebb A. 46. J.. Vol. 49-53. 648-658. M.-H. USA.. Montreal.. Hellendoorn H. Merrill. USA. Mech. of Engineering Manufacture 210. 13. 10. 7. USA. 1997. A. Research and Applications 3(4). 9.. J. 14. Oxford. 1987. Dong W. Charles E. 17. T. 2. Pittsburgh.L. I. Wong F S. Thurston D.. J.. Part B.. Industrial Press Inc. 616-625. Ohio. 271-279. Mech. J. 1992. 1996. Methods. ASME. “Machine Design: Theory and Practice”. pp.. “Fuzzy Ratings and Utility Analysis in Preliminary design Evaluation of Multiple Attributes. Canada.” Proc. Pennsylvania. IMechE... 301-320. Y. pp.References 1. Koning J. Part B.. pp.J. No. Cha. A.J.. Deutschman. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science. Transmissions. 1996. Carnahan J. “Metal Cutting Principles”. J. 37. Mott. 111. L. New York.A. U. 1972.. Springer-Verlag.

. Figure 2 Membership function of alternative rating and goal with respect to manufacturing requirements.Figure 1 Membership function for fuzzy numbers.

Figure 3 Membership function of alternative rating and goal with respect to application requirements. . Figure 4 Membership function of alternative rating and goal with respect to manufacturing and application requirements.

4% C. while Table A2 and Table A3 present some characteristics and some applications for the material alternatives respectively. 0. wear resistance.54% C.2% Mo -Oil-quenched from 843º C.54% C. (MPa) 380 Specific Gravity 7. and corrosion-resistance -Molybdenum have high-temperature tensile and creep strengths -Gray cast iron have 2.8-3. 0.7 Melting point (ºC) 1480-1520 223-262 223 121 80 120 725 414 550 310 469 550 --276 165 324 7.Appendix “A”: Properties of the selected materials: Table A1 shows the material alternatives properties.2 7.95% Cr. It possesses superior mechanical properties and corrosion resistance -Aluminum alloy 2024-T4 very good machinability. easily machined.7 7.18]. 0. Q & T Alloy Steel AISI 4140. tempered at 649 ºC -AISI 4140 posses 60% machinability.4% C.9 2. provide abrasion-resistance. (MPa) 655 Yield strength. 14].4% C.7 7. excellent surface finish.6% C -Gray cast iron: Cheapness. soft (BHN=180-240) -Aluminium Bronze have 90-95% bronze-5-10%aluminium -Aluminium: noncorrosive-1/3 weight of steel -Bronze: is basically an alloy of copper and tin. Q & T Characteristics -AISI 1050 Medium carbon steel having 0. natural lubricant. known by Chromium-molybdenum steel: 0. Criteria Alternatives Carbon Steel AISI 1050. 0. Q & T Alloy Steel AISI 4140. low melting temperature (1150-1250 ºC). 0. tempered at 593 ºC -AISI 1050 posses 50% machinability -AISI 4140 material having 0. good machinability.8 1430-1510 1350-1400 855-1060 800-950 485-660 Table A2: Some characteristics for different material alternatives [15 . It possesses superior mechanical properties and corrosion resistance -Tin: excellent resistance to corrosion -Bronze: is basically an alloy of copper and tin. Q & T Gray Cast Iron ASTM Class 60 Aluminium Bronze Heat Treated Tin Bronze Chill Cast Aluminium 2024 T4 Hardness (BHN) 212-248 Tensile strength. Table A1: Material properties [13.54% C -Oil-quenched from 815 ºC. vibration damping quality. high hardness at high temperature (greater hot-hardness) -Chromium increases depth-hardenability. sliding quality. for light duty applications Gray Cast Iron ASTM Class 60 Aluminium Bronze Heat Treated Tin Bronze Chill Cast Aluminium 2024 T4 . Criteria Alternatives Carbon Steel AISI 1050.

marine propellers. gears Gears.4% C. screw machine products . wheels. machine castings. shafts. water main pipes.Table A3: Some applications for different material alternatives [18]. bearings. bearings.54% C. chains and hooks Automotive parts. Criteria Alternatives Carbon Steel AISI 1050. washers. forgings Automobile cylinders and pistons. shafts. forging Gears. aircraft. bushings Aircraft structures. piston rings. 0. machine parts. Q & T Gray Cast Iron ASTM Class 60 Aluminium Bronze Heat Treated Tin Bronze Chill Cast Aluminium 2024 T4 Applications Shafts. pump casings. 0. machine parts. chemical plant equipment. Q & T Alloy Steel AISI 4140. gears. gears.

and distinguish between the increasing and the decreasing portions of the membership function of the fuzzy numbers. n1 n2) (B2) Consider a particular level for the desired membership function (for example the Carbon Steel Q & T alternative).Appendix “B”: Arithmetic calculations on Fuzzy Fuzzy numbers can be represented by using triangular membership functions. m1. the mode. n1) ⊕ (l2. and the upper limit of the support: (l. n2) = (l1+l2. (B4) is solved for α. Eq. and taking the positive root yields: μRa(r) = -35 / 12 + (864 r /144 . but rather one which is approximately triangular as follows: (l1. m1m2. n2) ≈ (l1l2. m1+m2. m2.239/144)1/2 61 / 36 ≤ ra ≤ 102 / 36 (B5) For the decreasing portion of the membership function ra = [(6-α)(4-α) + (3-α)(3-α) + (6-α)(6-α) + (4-α)(2-α) + (6-α )(6-α) + (6-α)6] / 36 (B6) and . The addition of two triangular fuzzy numbers is done as follows: (l1. ⎧0 ~ U 1 : x1 ⎨ ⎩( 1 − α ) / 6 ⎧( α + 2 ) / 6 ~ U 4 : x4 ⎨ ⎩( 4 − α ) / 6 ⎧( α + 5 ) / 6 ~ U 7 : x7 ⎨ ⎩1 ⎧α / 6 ~ U 2 : x2 ⎨ ⎩( 2 − α ) / 6 ⎧( α + 3 ) / 6 ~ U 5 : x5 ⎨ ⎩( 5 − α ) / 6 ⎧( α + 1 ) / 6 ~ U 3 : x3 ⎨ ⎩( 3 − α ) / 6 ⎧( α + 4 ) / 6 ~ U 6 : x6 ⎨ ⎩( 6 − α ) / 6 (B3) In case of Carbon Steel Q & T in the manufacturing decision matrix for example. express each of the membership functions in terms of α. m2. n1) ⊗ (l2. μRa(r) = α. for the increasing portion of the membership function. m1. m. It can be represented by a triplet which includes the lower limit of the support. n). n1+ n2) (B1) The multiplication of two triangular fuzzy numbers will not generally produce a triangular fuzzy number. the weighted average gives: ra = [(α+4)(α+2) + (α+1)(α+1) + (α+4)(α+4) + (α+2) α + (α+4)(α+4) + (α+4) (α+5)] / 36 (B4) and since the non-linear program has a solution when μRa(r) = α.

(720 r /100 . (B8) .276 / 100)1/2 102 / 36 ≤ ra ≤ 149 / 36 (B7) Then the exact membership function of Carbon Steel Q & T is shown as: 61 ⎧ ra ≤ 0 ⎪ 36 ⎪ 864r 239 61 102 ⎪ 35 ≤ ra ≤ ⎪− 12 + 144 − 144 36 36 ⎪ μ Ra (r ) = ⎨ 102 149 ⎪ 52 − 720r − 276 ≤ ra ≤ ⎪10 100 100 36 36 ⎪ 149 ⎪0 ra ≥ ⎪ 36 ⎩ Outside this interval the membership function is zero.μRa(r) = 52 / 10 .

- isca98e
- Fuzzy Approach
- 276-279
- good paper.pdf
- 0620_s11_qp_31
- Assignment 2 Material (2)
- Keluli
- ts202
- Corrected_R-70_Full_length_paper.doc
- STLF - Copy
- Tools
- Metal
- euspec
- 4.docx
- CAT-RNI-GNI-D-160712.pdf
- Power plants fuzzy latest.pdf
- Flanges Dimensions
- Gray Iron
- Type 2600 Flowstar
- The Properties of Cast Iron
- Materiais Astm Para Tubos Valvulas Flanges Acessorios e Parafusos_tecem
- European Scientific Journal Vol.8 no.7
- THE THEORY OF NEUTROSOPHIC CUBIC SETS AND THEIR APPLICATIONS IN PATTERN RECOGNITION
- A511A511M
- 2006-Study of the Degradation of Power Generation Combustion Components at Elevated Temperature
- 11 notes
- Design of the Neutrosophic Membership Valued Fuzzy-PID Controller and Rotation Angle Control of a Permanent Magnet Direct Current Motor
- BS EN 1092
- 1570 (Part II Sec I) Revised - Wrought Steeks for Plates
- Price Review 1 Entc 207.15a

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Loading