Aircraft Materials: Structure Requirements and Future

Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 2
1.2 Structural Properties in Materials Selection for Aircrafts................................................................ 5
1.2.1 Density............................................................................................................................................ 5
1.2.2 Structural Efficiency ..................................................................................................................... 7
1.2.3 Durability Considerations in Materials Selection .................................................................... 8
1.2.4 Oxidation in Materials Selection ................................................................................................ 9
1.2.5 Moisture Absorption in Materials Selection ............................................................................. 9
Wear and Erosion in Materials Selection ........................................................................................... 10
2.1 Economic and Business Considerations in Materials Selection ...................................................... 11
3.1 Environmental Considerations in Materials Selection .................................................................... 12
4.1 Specialist Properties in Materials Selection...................................................................................... 13
5.1 Future of Aircraft Materials .............................................................................................................. 13
References .................................................................................................................................................. 15

1
 Aircraft Materials: Structure Requirements and Future

Introduction
Material is key to the success of design and manufacturing of any component for any application.
The material selection is; therefore, a crucial factor and it varies according to the needs of the field
for which the material is synthesized. The materials of interest here are the ones that suit aircraft
design and manufacturing.

There are 2 factors that we look in materials: the design requirements of material and the properties
of the material. The properties of material decide the part of the aircraft where the material will be
best suited. As the properties for each part of the aircraft differ remarkably. Fig.1 shows the
material requirements for each part of the Airbus380.

Figure 1: Examples of design requirements for the fuselage and empennage of the Airbus 380.

There are 2 situations for material selection in aerospace:

1. Revolutionary Materials: it involves selecting material that is not previously used in

aircraft. For example, the first time use of GLARE in Airbus A380. It also includes using
existing material for a new application. For example, the use of carbon fiber-epoxy
composite in Boeing 787
2. Evolutionary Materials: it involves the use of materials that are previously used for the
same application. In this approach, the properties of materials improved to enhance

2
 functionality. For example, the modified Aluminum alloys for heat treatment and the alloy
content.

Cost, ease of manufacturing process, performance, and operating time are the factors important for
materials to meet design requirements. To identify the materials’ properties in early stages of
design the division of factors to following categories helps:

• structural properties,
• economic and business factors
• manufacturing issues
• durability in the aviation environment
• environmental impact
• specialist properties.

Figure 2: the material properties most often considered in the design of aircraft structures and
engines.

Thus, the material selection brings compromises along with the advantages.

3
 1.1 Materials Selection in Design

The abundance of materials makes the selection process difficult. Therefore, the selection of
materials is an organized process. The material and design process are linked. The stages
involved in the design process are:

Figure 3: Major stages of design and their relationship to materials selection (adapted from G.
E. Dieter ‘Overview of the materials selection process’, ASM handbook volume 20: materials
selection and design. American Society of Materials International, Ohio, 1997).

The first stage is the market assessment for the need for new aircraft and for the modification of
the material. In market assessment, all the important issues identified and all the questions about
the needs of aircraft functionality must be answered. A team of design engineers, manufacturing
engineers, materials engineers, financial analysts, and customer representatives carry the market
analysis.

During Concept Design the new product is configured for the design and performance objectives.
In this section, customer needs are the key point of focus. In concept design the big picture
becomes clear but there still need improvement for fine details. Does the concept design confirm
what the material will do? But it does not focus on the properties of the material. During this stage,
several options are considered for materials and the main material category decided. For example:
whether the material will be metal alloy or polymer or a composite.

During Embodiment Design the shape and size of the product confirmed. The environmental role
and functionality of the material assessed. The material properties are identified as the cost, weight,
strength and corrosion resistance. The materials then ranked according to the property requirement.

4
The final step is Detailed Design during which the design is completed and converted to
specifications. This step leads to a single material that is best suited to the design requirements.

1.2 Structural Properties in Materials Selection for Aircrafts

1.2.1 Density

The use of lightweight materials together with optimized design has always been the most
effective way of reducing the structural mass of aircraft. The use of low-density materials
on their own does not necessarily provide a large weight saving; it must be combined with
design methods for reducing mass to be fully effective. Similarly, the lightweight design
on its own does not reduce the mass significantly unless it includes the use of low-density
materials.
The structural mass of most aircraft is within the range of 20 to 40% of the take-off gross
weight. Therefore, using low-density materials in the airframe translates to a large saving
in the overall aircraft weight. For example, the structural mass of a B737-NG is about 22
500 kg (depending on the exact aircraft type) and substituting all of the aluminum alloys
with a density of 2.7 g cm–3 with slightly lighter carbon fiber–epoxy composite with a
density of 2.0 g cm–3 in principle provides a weight saving of around 3500 kg (or about
15% of the total mass).
As an approximation, reducing the structural mass by 1 kg on a mid-sized airliner provides
about another 1 kg reduction in aircraft weight using smaller engines to maintain the same
airspeed as well as smaller wings to keep the same wing loading. A strong incentive exists
to achieve even a modest reduction in weight using light materials. It is estimated that, for
every 1 kg saved on an average-sized airliner, the fuel consumption can be reduced by
about 800 l year–1. Therefore, a large reduction in structural weight translates to a
substantial reduction in fuel burn with corresponding reductions in fuel cost, greenhouse
and other gas emissions.
Figure 4 shows the projected reductions in fuel consumption and gas emissions by lowering
the percentage structural mass of a typical mid-sized airliner using light materials.

5
Figure 4: Approximate reductions in annual fuel consumption and carbon dioxide (greenhouse)
gas emission with percentage reduction to the weight of a mid-sized passenger aircraft.

It has been estimated that reducing the material density is anywhere from 3 to 5 times more
effective than increasing the tensile strength, modulus and fracture toughness of the material.
Figure 5 shows the effect of improvements to various properties of a material on the structural
weight change.

Figure 5: Effect of property improvement on the structural weight (reproduced from F. H. Froes
et al., Proceedings of the International Conference on Light Materials for Transportation
Systems, Korea, 1993).

6
1.2.2 Structural Efficiency

Stiffness is an important design constraint for many aerospace structures because of the
need to avoid excessive deformation and buckling.

Figure 6: Elastic modulus and structural efficiency of aerospace materials used in stiffness-
critical applications

Figure 6 shows provide the elastic modulus and stiffness efficiency properties of various aerospace
materials. It is usually the structural efficiency (also called specific property), expressed as the
mechanical property normalized by the density of the material that is considered in aircraft
materials selection rather than the absolute property of the material. This is because some
lightweight materials may have relatively low stiffness and strength, but when these properties are
normalized by the density they are superior to heavier materials with higher mechanical properties.
For example, the elastic modulus of carbon fiber–epoxy composite used in stiffness-critical
structures is about 120 GPa, which is less than the modulus of steel at 210 GPa. However, the
composite material is around 3.5 times lighter than steel and, therefore, when the specific stiffness
(E/r) of these materials is compared then the carbon–epoxy is nearly three times greater. The
relative improvement in stiffness efficiency is even higher for beams (E/r2 ) and plates (E/r3 )
under bending loads. The specific static strength is a key factor in materials selection for aerospace
structures. Aircraft components are designed to withstand the maximum operating stress plus a
safety factor, which is typically 1.5. Figure 7 shows Yield strength and structural efficiency of
aerospace materials used in strength-critical applications.

7
Figure 7: Yield strength and structural efficiency of aerospace materials used in strength-critical
applications

The material with the highest strength is high-strength (maraging) steel, which is used in safety-
critical components requiring high yield strength such as the undercarriage landing gear and the
wing carry-through the structure, although it does not have the highest strength efficiency.
Titanium alloys and carbon–fiber composites have high strength and structural efficiency and are
also used in heavily-loaded aircraft components. Fiberglass composites also have high-strength
efficiency, but their stiffness efficiency is relatively low.

Damage tolerance is another important property in materials selection, and this defines the ability
of a load-bearing structure to retain strength and resist crack growth when a defect or damage is
present. Aerospace materials can contain small flaws such as processing defects (e.g. porosity,
brittle inclusion particles) or in-service damage (e.g. impact, corrosion), and it is essential that
these do not grow rapidly during aircraft operations otherwise it can lead to structural failure.
Materials with the greatest damage tolerance generally possess high fracture toughness combined
with excellent fatigue resistance defined by a slow rate of fatigue crack growth. Other mechanical
properties considered in materials selection can include the structural efficiency (specific stiffness
and specific strength) at high temperature, creep resistance, and fatigue performance (crack growth
rate, life, and residual strength).

1.2.3 Durability Considerations in Materials Selection

The durability of materials in the operating environment of the aircraft is an important

consideration in minimizing maintenance and extending the service life. The environment
may be hot, humid, corrosive, abrasive or some other potentially damaging condition. Both

8
 metals and fiber–polymer composites are susceptible to environmental degradation during
service and selecting a material with the best durability is an important consideration.

Figure 8: Relative distribution of costs for military aircraft. Material costs are a small
fraction of the total cost.

Figure 8 shows that maintenance of the airframe and engine accounts for a large percentage
(~26%) of the whole-of-life cost, and a significant amount of this cost is the expense of inspecting
materials for environmental damage and, when detected, repairing or replacing the component.

1.2.4 Oxidation in Materials Selection

Oxidation is another type of environmental damage that must be considered in materials

selection, particularly materials for high-temperature applications, such as jet and rocket
engines. Oxidation is a reaction process between the material and oxidizing agents in the
atmosphere, such as oxygen in air or sulfur dioxide in the combustion gas of jet fuel. The
reaction damages the metal by forming a thick surface layer of brittle metal oxide.
Oxidation is not usually a problem for aircraft materials unless they are used for high-
temperature applications when it is essential to select a material with high resistance to
oxidation or a material that can be thermally insulated using an oxidation-resistant coating.

1.2.5 Moisture Absorption in Materials Selection

Unlike metals, fiber–polymer composite materials are not susceptible to corrosion and are
not used in hot environments where oxidation is a problem. However, composites are not
immune to the environment and may be damaged in other ways. Composites are
susceptible to environmental damage by absorbing water in the atmosphere. Water
molecules are absorbed into the polymer matrix of composites where they cause softening

9
 and lower the glass transition temperature. With some types of composites, the absorption
of water can cause delamination cracking, fiber/matrix debonding, and damage to the core
material (with sandwich materials). Water can also be absorbed by organic fibers used in
composites, such as aramid, which further weakens the material. The deterioration of
composites by moisture absorption is a consideration in materials selection, particularly
when the aircraft is required to operate in tropical regions where the atmosphere is hot and
wet. The polymer matrix and organic fibers used in composites may also be degraded by
long-term exposure to ultraviolet radiation in sunlight. Consideration of the environmental
stability of composites is essential in materials selection, and numerous types of composites
are available which are resistant to degradation by moisture and ultraviolet radiation.

Wear and Erosion in Materials Selection

Damage by wear and erosion may be another consideration in assessing the durability
properties of aerospace materials. Wear is not usually a serious problem except when
materials are used in engines and other moving parts when selecting a material with high
wear resistance is important.

Figure 9: Materials selection chart for wear rate constant versus hardness. Reproduced from M.
F. Ashby. Materials selection in mechanical design, Butterworth–Heinemann, Massachusetts,
1999.

Figure 9 shows present a materials selection chart for the wear rate constant versus hardness. The
wear rate constant ka is a measure of sliding wear resistance: low ka means high wear resistance
at a given bearing pressure. With a single group of materials, such as metals or polymers, it is

10
generally found that the wear rate constant decreases with increasing hardness. Therefore,
selecting a material for high wear resistance is often based on the hardness and yield strength
properties. Erosion is a specific type of wear involving the removal of material under impact from
abrasive particles such as sand or dirt. Erosion is a consideration for materials used at the external
surface of the main rotor blades for helicopters and propeller blades for aircraft. The erosion
resistance of materials, like their sliding wear resistance, increases with the surface hardness and
strength.

2.1 Economic and Business Considerations in Materials Selection

An important consideration in the selection of materials is their whole-of-life cost. This cost
includes all expenses associated with the material from initial manufacturing to final retirement of
the aircraft and consists of the costs of the raw material, processing and manufacturing, in-service
maintenance, repair, and recycling and disposal. The decision on materials selection often comes
down to a trade-off between performance and cost.

In the materials selection process, the cost is not considered in isolation from the other properties
required from the material. The cost of the material is assessed against other important properties
such as stiffness, strength and corrosion resistance, and a more expensive material may be selected
because it has superior properties to a less expensive material. Sometimes, materials that are
expensive are justified because they offer a unique property advantage or because they are cheaper
to use than other lower-cost materials; for example, a design might be simplified and, thus, made
at a lower cost.

Figure 8 presents a materials selection chart of cost–strength for different groups of engineering
materials. The cost of most materials, including the metal alloys and composites used in aircraft
structures and engines, vary over a wide range depending on their composition and processing.
Expensive metals such as titanium and nickel alloys are preferred over cheaper materials when
high specific strength and creep resistance at elevated temperature are required. Similarly, carbon
fiber composites are used in aircraft structures rather than the cheaper glass–fiber composites
because of their superior stiffness and fatigue strength.

11
Figure 10: Materials selection chart for cost–strength. (Provided courtesy of the Department of
Engineering, University of Cambridge.)

The potential to reduce maintenance cost is a consideration in materials selection.

3.1 Environmental Considerations in Materials Selection

Consideration of the environmental impact of materials is fast becoming a key factor in materials
selection for aircraft. Whenever possible, materials obtained from sustainable resources and which
have a low impact on the environment during their production, usage, and disposal should be
considered. The aerospace industry is keen to use sustainable materials to minimize the
environmental impact of aircraft. Sustainability is defined as the ability of a material to be used
infinitely, which involves recycling the material at the end-of-life for reuse in new aircraft or some
other application. Recycling avoids the need to extract new material from a non-renewable
resource such as ore for metals or petroleum products for carbon fibers and polymers. If some
material is deemed ‘sustainable’ and cheap to recycle, this is a favorable selection factor,
particularly for materials used in high tonnage such as aluminum. The ability to recycle varies
considerably among the various aerospace materials, with aluminum and steel being relatively
easy to recycle, titanium and magnesium being more difficult to recycle, and composite materials
being extremely difficult (if not impossible) to fully recycle.

The aerospace industry is also keen to minimize the so-called ‘carbon footprint’ of materials,
which is another consideration in materials selection.

12
 4.1 Specialist Properties in Materials Selection
Specialist properties are considered for aircraft materials used in components for a unique
application. The specialist property may be the most important consideration in materials selection,
and other properties such as the cost, ease of manufacture or mechanical performance could be of
lesser importance. For example, resistance against cracking and spalling owing to rapid heating,
known as thermal shock resistance, is an essential property for materials used in the exhaust casing
of rocket engines. Listed below are several specialist properties which may be considered in
materials selection:

• Electrical conductivity is an important property for materials used in the outer skin of
aircraft. The material must have the ability to conduct an electrical charge in the event of a
lightning strike.
• Thermal conductivity is a consideration for materials used in high-temperature
applications such as heat shields and engine components. Heat-shield materials require low
thermal conductivity to protect the airframe structure from excessive heating.
• Thermal expansion is also a consideration for high-temperature materials. Materials with
a low thermal expansion coefficient are often required to avoid excessive expansion and
contraction during heating and cooling.
• Flammability is a consideration for materials where there is the risk of fire, such as aircraft
cabins and jet engines. Flammability properties such as ignition temperature, flame spread
rate and smoke may need to be considered.
• Stealth is an important property for materials used in the external surface of covert military
aircraft. Materials with the capability to absorb radar waves and/or reduce infrared
visibility are important for stealth aircraft.

5.1 Future of Aircraft Materials

Lighter, stronger and increasingly efficient, composite materials have only just begun to
revolutionize the aerospace sector. Reducing the weight of aircraft is a constant challenge for the
aerospace industry. The goal is to cut fuel consumption and associated CO2 emissions with a view
to providing more economical and "greener" air transport.

Metallic and composite materials alike continue to be developed and improved to offer ever-
increasing performance, whether that’s lighter weight, greater strength, or better heat and corrosion
resistance. Accelerating this evolution of new materials, advancements in machining and cutting
technology give manufacturers unprecedented access to materials previously deemed impractical
or too difficult to machine. New material adoption is happening exceptionally quickly in
aerospace, requiring DFM-minded interaction between material characteristics and component
design. The two must be in balance, and one can’t really exist outside of the context of the other.

13
Meanwhile, one-piece designs are continuing to reduce the number of components in overall
assemblies. In general, this bodes well for composites in aerospace, which can be formed instead
of machined. A variation of this trend exists in metallic structures, as more components are
conditioned in forgings to get to near-net shape, reducing the amount of machining. Elephant skins,
roughed-in shapes, and thin floor sections all reduce material costs and the total number of
components, but setup and fixturing continue to be challenges. Some manufacturers are turning to
waterjet and other technologies to reduce or eliminate raw stock materials in need of removal. Still,
difficulties exist in work holding, surface finish, and CAM tool paths. But designers, machinists,
engineers, and machine tool/cutting tool partners are developing new solutions to keep the
evolution churning forward.

The mix of materials in aerospace will continue to change in the coming years with composites,
freshly machinable metals, and new metals increasingly occupying the space of traditional
materials. The industry continues to march toward components of lighter weights, increased
strengths, and greater heat and corrosion resistance. Component counts will decrease in favor of
stronger, near-net shapes, and design will continue its close collaboration with material
characteristics. Machine tools builders and cutting tool manufacturers will continue to develop
tools to make currently unviable materials machinable, and even practical. And it’s all done in the
name of reducing the cost of aerospace manufacturer, improving fuel economy through efficiency
and light weighting, and making air travel a more cost-effective means of transportation.

14
 References

➢ Ashby, M. F., Materials selection in mechanical design, 3rd edition, Butterworth– Heinemann,
Oxford, 2005.
➢ Ashby, M. F. and Cebon, D., Cambridge materials selector, Granta Design Ltd., Cambridge MA,
1996.
➢ Budinski, K. G. and Budinski, M. K., Engineering materials: properties and selection, Pearson
Education Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2010.
➢ Dieter, G. E. (editor), ASM handbook volume 20: materials selection and design, ASM
International, Ohio, 1997.
➢ Hinrichsen, J., ‘The material down-selection process for A3XX’, in Around Glare, edited by C.
Vermeeren, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002, pp. 127–144.
➢ Peel, C. J., and P. J. Gregson. "Design requirements for aerospace structural materials." High
performance materials in aerospace. Springer, Dordrecht, 1995. 1-48.
➢ Williams, James C., and Edgar A. Starke Jr. "Progress in structural materials for aerospace
systems." Acta Materialia 51.19 (2003): 5775-5799.
➢ Vogelesang, L. B., and J. W. Gunnink. "ARALL: A materials challenge for the next generation of
aircraft." Materials & Design 7.6 (1986): 287-300.
➢ Williams, James C., and Edgar A. Starke Jr. "Progress in structural materials for aerospace
systems." Acta Materialia 51.19 (2003): 5775-5799.

15