Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-tdptf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-23T04:19:01.224Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

FGMs High-Heat-Flux Environments: Cost/Performance Issues

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2013

John J. Lannutti
Get access

Extract

This article focuses exclusively on the application of functionally gradient materials (FGMs) as structural components in high-heat-flux environments. Preliminary data suggest that FGMs can equal or surpass the properties of fiber-reinforced composites (FRCs) in these applications at a fraction of the material costs. An optimistic value of $1 per foot for 100-μm-diameter Saphikon alumina fiber yields a per-pound cost of $48,000. In contrast, a costly alumina powder used for FGMs might be in the range of .$20 per pound. While many counter-arguments can be advanced, this price differential cannot be easily overcome.

One relative difficulty with FGMs is their inherent compositional flexibility which, ironically, is normally considered an advantage. Determination of the optimum material combination for a given application should precede any effort directed toward determining the “best” processing route. This combination will then specify the processing technique. This would “short circuit” the expensive learning curve historically associated with FRCs.

“Processing for processing's sake” is no longer a viable option in today's composite research market. Without necessary advances in the predictive modeling of structure, composition (and, concurrently, cost) and behavior, FGMs may remain an “on-the-horizon” advanced composite.

Type
Functionally Gradient Materials
Information
MRS Bulletin , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , January 1995 , pp. 50 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Miller, D.P., Lannutti, J.J., and Yancey, R.N., Proc. 16th Annual Conf. Composites and Adv. Cer. Mat. (The American Ceramic Society, Westerville, OH, 1992) p. 365.Google Scholar
2.Atarashijya, K., Kazuya, K., Nagai, T., and Uda, M., Proc. 16th Annual Conf. Composites and Adv. Cer. Mat. (The American Ceramic Society, Westerville, OH, 1992) p. 400.Google Scholar
3.Miller, D.P., Lannutti, J.J., and Noebe, R.D., J. Mat. Res. 8 (8) (1993) p. 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Ma, X., Tanihata, K., Miyamoto, Y., Kumakawa, A., Nagata, S., Yamada, T., and Hirano, T., Proc. 16th Annual Conf. Composites and Adv. Cer. Mat. (The American Ceramic Society, Westerville, OH, 1992) p. 356.Google Scholar
5.Lannutti, J.J., Comp. Eng. 4 (1) (1994) p. 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Jordan, D.W. and Faber, K.T., Thin Solid Films 235 (1993) p. 137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Doychak, J., Nesbitt, J.A., Noebe, R.D., and Bowman, R.R., Oxidation of Metals 38 (1,2) (1992) p. 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Miller, D.P. and Lannutti, J.J., unpublished.Google Scholar
9.Bowman, R.R., in Intermetallic Matrix Composites II, edited by Miracle, D.B. and Graves, J.A. (Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 273, Pittsburgh, PA, 1992).Google Scholar