integrated computational materials engineering for ... documents/2015 icme...processing. inspection...

Copyright © 2012 Boeing. All rights reserved.

Progress in Implementation of ICME for Metallic Materials in the Airframe IndustryRyan GlammDana RosenbladtEric PripsteinBrett JohansonJim Cotton

BR&TMetallic Materials

1/5/2015EOT_RT_Template.ppt | 2/23/2012 1


Engineering, Operations & Technology | Boeing Research & Technology

Outline

Need for ICMEAirplane development vs. airplane material developmentMaterial development stages-where can ICME assist?Materials as systemsCurrent gapsSummary

G. Olson, 1997, Science EOT_RT_Template.ppt | 2



747-400

EOT_RT_Template.ppt | 3



Number of New Structural Alloy / Product Forms by Year on BCA Transports

012345678

767 777 787-8

1981 1995 2009

# N

ew A

lloy

Prod

uct F

orm

s

Base Model and Entry-into-Service Year




Airframe Metallic Materials Evolution

AL ALLOY DEVELOPMENT (EIS for System Utilizing Alloy)7081, 20272050, 2022

7349 2397 2196, 6056 7081, 20232017 2024 2195 2297 2056, 6156 2139, 2013

7075 2618 6061 7055 7040 7036 70562014 7475 7150 8090 2524 7055 2098 7140 7055-T627175 2219 7050 2324 6056 7449 6019 2099, 2199 2198

7178 2027 2124 2224 6013 2090 7039 2524 7136 7085

DC -3 B-29 B-707 B-727 B-747 L1011 B-757 C-17 F18 B-777 EMB 170 747-LCF 747-8B-17 DC-8 B-737 DC-10 B-767 SLWT F16 Retro F-22 A380B-247 COMET CONCORDE A-319 787

A-340A-330

AIRCRAFT

TITANIUM AND STEEL ALLOYSTi-10-2-3 Ti62222 Ti5553 C465β21S

1990 20001940 1950 1960 19701910 1920 1930 1980

Increasing # Materials, Optimization and Tailored for Performance and Production

Ti-13-11-3

SR 71 F-15

Ti-64

F18-E/F

Aermet 100

Ti-662 Ti-6242

4340

Ti-6242

15-5PH 13-8PH

β-CTi-811

7075

7178

2618201471752027

74752219 7050

2124

715023242224 6013

809060562090

734921957055252474497039

239722977040705560192524

20982099, 21997136

7056714021987085



Computer Based Engineering Paradigm Shifts

CFDComputational fluid dynamics speeded development cycle, eliminated a significant amount of tunnel tests and provided aerodynamic insight

FEMFinite Element Methods speeded development of structural concepts, eliminated a significant amount of testing and provided insight into structural performance

CADComputer Aided Design accelerated design cycle, eliminated a physical mockup and linked definition with manufacturing

EOT_RT_Sub_Template.ppt | 12/16/2009 | Materials & Fabrication Technology 7



Boeing Products

Last produced in 1962, expected service life into 2040s




Materials & Structures designed, analyzed, and qualified in digital form with requirements driven by system & life-cycle requirements

Material Performance to Application

ConstituentDesign

MaterialConfigurations

ElementDesign

Sub-ComponentDesigns

ComponentDesigns

• Material Development• Process Development

AtomisticModeling

MaterialModels

ComputationalAllowables

Failure Modeling

Virtual Testing& Sim

ComputationalDesign Values

• Producibility• Accept/Reject• Assembly• NDT Standards

• Mechanical Props• Knock-downs• Environmental• Effects of Defects

• Structural Performance

• Damage Tolerance• Static & Fatigue• Analysis Validation

• Design Values• DaDT• Analysis Validation

Full Scale

• Static• GVT• Fatigue• Flight

Vehicle



Airplane Development vs. Airplane MaterialDevelopment

AirplaneDev

MaterialsDev

Airplane Study

Time (Years)

Market Firm Config. Build EIS

Materials Need ID’d R&D Scale-

UpDesign

Allowables

5-7 Years

8-10 Years (reality)

Prod. Ready

Launch

Production Materials Orders

Previous Dev Efforts

2-3 Years (ideal)

10



Materials Data Required for Airframe Applications

Physical Properties

Static Mech. Properties

Durability and Damage Tolerance Properties

Environmental Effects Producibility Certification

Density

Thermal Expansion

Heat Capacity

Thermal Conductivity

Poisson’s Ratio

Tensile, Compression,

Shear and Bulk Modulus

Tensile Strength

Compressive Strength

Shear Strength

Bearing Strength

Fatigue Strength

Notch Sensitivity

Crack Growth

Toughness

Special Design Factors

TemperatureHumidity

Chemical Resistance

Wear

Corrosion Resistance

Oxidation Resistance

Castability

Formability

Deformation Characteristics

Weldability

Machinability

Assembly

Chemical Processing

Inspection Methods

Material Specs

Process Specs

Approved Supplier List

Repair Methods

Safety

MSDS




Typical Stages for Development of New Aircraft Material

1. New Material Need Established• Applications• Benefit• Timing of Need• Performance Requirements Established• Properties• Product Forms

• 1-2 years• $$

2. Development Plan / Teaming• Who, Where• Intellectual Property

• Funding Secured

• 1-3 years• $$

3. Exploratory Materials Design; Lab Scale Studies• Exploration of Candidate Systems

• Matrix Approach• Optimization based on Physical Principles

• Chemistry and Process Downselect

• 1-3 years• $$

4. Process Scale-Up• Plant Trials• Intermediate To Full Scale Batches or Heats

• Performance Validation

• Fabrication Characteristics

• Trade Studies, NPV

• 2-3 years• $$$

5. Design Allowables• Full Scale Product Forms

• Establish Production Variability / Stats

• Static, Fatigue, DT, Corrosion

• Spec Development

• 2 years• $$$

6. Supplier Qualification and Implementation• Part Fab and Destructive Testing

• Market / Contract Pricing

• Production Preparation

• 1-2 years• $

7. In-Service Support• Environmental Effects

• Loading / Thermal / Fatigue Damage

• Notices of Escape / Quality Issues

• Repair / Refurbishment

• Life Extension

• Life of program• $$

$ - $10K’s$$ - $100K’s$$$ - $1000K’s




Structural Material Property Requirements

Upper Wing – CompressionSkins and Stringers:Fcy, E, S-N, K1c, Kapp, da/dn, corrosion

Lower Wing – TensionSkins and Stringers:Ftu, S-N, K1c, Kapp, da/dn, corrosion

Fuselage Skins, Frames and StringersE, Fty, Fcy Fsu S-N, Kapp, da/dn, corrosion



Determining Property Targets/Tradeoffs

Relative property importance (commercial transport)

Material Properties (in typical order of importance):

•Density•Fatigue Performance•Fracture Toughness•Compression Strength

Upper Wing Skins•Comp. Strength•Shear Strength•Corrosion Resistance•Damage Tolerance

Lower Wing•Fatigue•Damage Tolerance•Tension Strength•Shear Strength

Fuselage Skins•Fatigue•Damage Tolerance

Fuselage Stringers •Comp.Strength•Fatigue•Stiffness•Corrosion resistance

-10.0%

-8.0%

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

-10.0% -8.0% -6.0% -4.0% -2.0% 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0%

Wei

ght C

hang

e (%

)

Property Improvement (%)

Wide-body Fuselage Skin-stringer Panels

Fatigue

Kapp

Fcy

Density

Baseline is 2524 skins and 7150 stringers

1. New Material Need Established• Applications• Benefit• Timing of Need• Performance Requirements Established• Properties• Product Forms

• 1-2 years• $$



Exploratory Materials Design

•Avoid large experimental matrices•Provide limited critical property estimates/tradeoffs•Guide experiments and aid interpretation•Feasibility of processing within commercial practice

3. Exploratory Materials Design; Lab Scale Studies• Exploration of Candidate Systems

• Matrix Approach• Optimization based on Physical Principles

•Chemistry and Process Downselect

•1-3 years• $$




Exploratory Material Process Response

Feasibility of new process for existing material

Solid state joining peak temperature for high strength stainless steel

Equilibrium step plot exploring effects of carburization for potential gear application




Process Scale Up

Time/temperature/precipitation prediction to guide processing requirements

Kinetic differences from small melts to full size ingots and components can be several orders of magnitude Aid in design of small scale experiments to imitate scale up ICME may permit bypassing scale-up altogether

4. Process Scale-Up•Plant Trials•Intermediate To Full Scale Batches or Heats

•Performance Validation

• Fabrication Characteristics

•Trade Studies, NPV

•2-3 years• $$$




Design Allowables

Finite element models predict large panel deformation behavior from small scale testing

Exp

erim

enta

l Tou

ghne

ss

Predicted Toughness

Predict and validate→know answer to justify allowables effortSensitivity to process deviationsGuide acceptance testing for specification development




Fatigue performance

Actual Fatigue Performance

Pre

dict

ed F

atig

ue P

erfo

rman

ce

Large drive to reduce fatigue testing--costly and time consuming

Fatigue performance predictions for commercial aluminum alloys




In-Service Support

20

Aircraft operate in many different environments, mission requirementsBetter prediction for in-service performance neededPotential to optimize maintenance interval guidance

The effect of pitting corrosion of 7075-T6 on fatigue behavior:



7XXX Materials Design Chart

Physics based mechanistic relationships ideal, not requiredEOT_RT_Template.ppt | 21



ICME Analyst Challenges

“Turn around” time

Cost vs Value of Analysis

Exactness vs Good Enough

Good enough for a decision

Amount of simulation & analysis

DocumentationC

ost o

r Val

ue(D

olla

rs o

r Tim

e)

Exactness of Answer

Value

Cost

StressWeightsM&P

Time

Non

Rec

urrin

g

Man

Hou

rs



Summary

Computational methods critical to future improvementAerospace structural materials require a lot of reliable

information to incorporate ICME methodsWe need help Prediction of sensitivity to process deviations (chemistry, deformation,

heat treat) Durability, damage tolerance and corrosion properties Virtual property distributions Prediction of material degradation over entire service life User friendly software for practicing metallurgist Acceptance by regulatory agencies

Large gaps in ICME predictive capability exist


integrated computational materials engineering for ... documents/2015 icme...processing. inspection...

Documents