C haPter 5 Material Property Charts and their Uses
170
sec. If acceleration is not important to you, cars near the tangent
point of the first penalty line are the best choice: the Renault Clio
1.4 or the Toyota Yaris 1.4. If instead acceleration is what you want,
cars near the tangent point of the second penalty line are the best
bet: the Subaru Impreza 2.0 or the Mitsubishi Evo R3. But you
should be aware that your running costs are inflated, even with the
optimizing of cost we have just performed, by a factor of almost 3.
Acceleration does not come cheap.
This is all about perceived value. Advertising aims to increase the
perceived value of a product, increasing its value without increasing
its cost. It influences the exchange constants for family cars, and it
is the driver for the development of titanium watches, carbon fiber
spectacle frames, and a great deal of sports equipment.
There are other circumstances in which establishing the exchange
constant can be more difficult. An example is that of environmental
impact—the damage to the environment caused by manufacture,
use, or disposal of a given product. Minimizing environmental
impact has now become an important objective, almost as important as minimizing cost. Ingenious design can reduce the first
without driving the second up too much. But how much is unit
decrease in impact worth? Until an exchange constant is agreed or
imposed, it is difficult for the designer to respond.
FUrther reaDing
M. F. Ashby, Materials selection in mechanical design, 3
rd ed., Chapter 4,
Butterworth Heinemann, 2005, ISBN 0-7506-6168-2.
M. F. Ashby, Multi-objective optimization in material design and selection,
Acta Mater., 2008, Vol. 48, pp. 359–369.
M. F. Ashby and K. Johnson, Materials and design: the art and science of
material selection in product design, Butterworth Heinemann, 2002,
ISBN 0-7506-5554-2.
M. F. Ashby, H. R. Shercliff, and D. Cebon, Materials: engineering, science,
processing and design, Butterworth Heinemann, 2007, ISBN-13: 9780-7506-8391-3.
J. P. Clark, R. Roth, and F. R. Field, Techno-economic issues in material
science, ASM Handbook, Vol. 20, Materials Selection and Design, G.
E. Dieter (ed.), ASM International, 1997, pp. 255–265, ISBN 0-87170386-6.
G. E. Dieter, Engineering design, a materials and processing approach,
3
rd ed., McGraw-Hill, 2000, pp. 150–153 and 255–257, ISBN 0-07366136-8.
F. R. Field and R. de Neufville, Material selection – maximizing overall utility, Metals and Materials, June 1998, pp. 378–382.
A. Goicoechea, D. R. Hansen, and L. Druckstein, Multi-objective decision
analysis with engineering and business applications, Wiley, 1982.
170
sec. If acceleration is not important to you, cars near the tangent
point of the first penalty line are the best choice: the Renault Clio
1.4 or the Toyota Yaris 1.4. If instead acceleration is what you want,
cars near the tangent point of the second penalty line are the best
bet: the Subaru Impreza 2.0 or the Mitsubishi Evo R3. But you
should be aware that your running costs are inflated, even with the
optimizing of cost we have just performed, by a factor of almost 3.
Acceleration does not come cheap.
This is all about perceived value. Advertising aims to increase the
perceived value of a product, increasing its value without increasing
its cost. It influences the exchange constants for family cars, and it
is the driver for the development of titanium watches, carbon fiber
spectacle frames, and a great deal of sports equipment.
There are other circumstances in which establishing the exchange
constant can be more difficult. An example is that of environmental
impact—the damage to the environment caused by manufacture,
use, or disposal of a given product. Minimizing environmental
impact has now become an important objective, almost as important as minimizing cost. Ingenious design can reduce the first
without driving the second up too much. But how much is unit
decrease in impact worth? Until an exchange constant is agreed or
imposed, it is difficult for the designer to respond.
FUrther reaDing
M. F. Ashby, Materials selection in mechanical design, 3
rd ed., Chapter 4,
Butterworth Heinemann, 2005, ISBN 0-7506-6168-2.
M. F. Ashby, Multi-objective optimization in material design and selection,
Acta Mater., 2008, Vol. 48, pp. 359–369.
M. F. Ashby and K. Johnson, Materials and design: the art and science of
material selection in product design, Butterworth Heinemann, 2002,
ISBN 0-7506-5554-2.
M. F. Ashby, H. R. Shercliff, and D. Cebon, Materials: engineering, science,
processing and design, Butterworth Heinemann, 2007, ISBN-13: 9780-7506-8391-3.
J. P. Clark, R. Roth, and F. R. Field, Techno-economic issues in material
science, ASM Handbook, Vol. 20, Materials Selection and Design, G.
E. Dieter (ed.), ASM International, 1997, pp. 255–265, ISBN 0-87170386-6.
G. E. Dieter, Engineering design, a materials and processing approach,
3
rd ed., McGraw-Hill, 2000, pp. 150–153 and 255–257, ISBN 0-07366136-8.
F. R. Field and R. de Neufville, Material selection – maximizing overall utility, Metals and Materials, June 1998, pp. 378–382.
A. Goicoechea, D. R. Hansen, and L. Druckstein, Multi-objective decision
analysis with engineering and business applications, Wiley, 1982.