Materials and Design 46 (2013) 552–560

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matdes

Review

Materials selection in design of structures and engines of supersonic aircrafts:

A review
Zainul Huda a,⇑, Prasetyo Edi b
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Majmaah University, P.O. Box 66, Majmaah 11952, Saudi Arabia
b
Department of Aerospace Engineering, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran 50603, Saudi Arabia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This article reviews the advances in the materials selection for applications in structures and engines of
Received 16 June 2012 current and future supersonic aircrafts. A brief overview of configuration design of the supersonic air-
Accepted 1 October 2012 crafts is first given; which also includes techniques to improve configuration design for future supersonic
Available online 25 October 2012
aircrafts. The operating and ambient environmental conditions during supersonic flight and the resulting
material requirements have been discussed; and consequently various aerospace aluminum alloys, tita-
Keywords: nium alloys, superalloys, and composites have been recommended. Finally, a new materials-selection
Materials selection
chart is presented that would enable aerospace designers to select appropriate materials for application
Aerospace aluminum alloys
Superalloys
in high-performance current and future supersonic/hypersonic aircrafts.
Composites Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Configuration design
Supersonic aircrafts

1. Introduction
Supersonic aircrafts are capable of flying at speeds greater than
750 mi/h (1207 km/h) but less than 2000 mi/h (3219 km/h), and
the Mach number M is greater than one, 1 < M < 4. The design of a
supersonic aircraft and its materials selection must be based on
sound engineering principles and practices since a small mistake
in the design of the aircraft’s fuselage, skeleton, wing, or any critical
part could be fatal. The important material selection considerations
in the design of a supersonic aircraft include: specific strength
(strength-to-weight ratio), tensile mechanical properties, fatigue
strength, low-speed impact strength, fracture toughness, notch sen-
sitivity, fabricability, and resistances to crack propagation, stress
corrosion, and exfoliation corrosion [1–3]. Another material require-
ment, directly related to the supersonic aircraft’s design is the resis-
tance to creep since long-term operation at Mach 3.5 may heat up
the structure of the aircraft to a temperature around 300 °C [4,5].
One of the initial designs of the supersonic transport (SST) air-
craft: Concorde was based on the selection of aluminum alloy as
the basic structural material; this material selection was closely
linked to the choice of Mach 2 as the design cruise speed. However,
almost every country has rejected Concorde due to its sonic boom
and possibility depletion of ozone due to the pollutants in the en-
gine’s exhaust. Sonic boom is the ‘‘thunder-like’’ noise produced
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +966 554130411.
E-mail addresses: drzainulhuda@hotmail.com (Z. Huda), eprasetyo@kfupm.
edu.sa (P. Edi).
when a plane is traveling faster than the speed of sound [6]. This
is why; almost all the supersonic aircrafts designed to-date are mil-
itary aircraft; which are mainly made of lightweight carbon-fiber
reinforced polymer (CFRP) composite materials possessing high
specific strength, fatigue strength, corrosion-resistance, and rea-
sonably high creep strength [7,8]. Another practical requirement
in the aerospace composites is their ability to be repaired when
the skin of the aircraft panel becomes disbonded [9]. In addition
to military aircrafts, CFRP are used in SCT aircrafts; for instance,
much of the fuselage of the new Boeing 787 Dreamliner and Airbus
A350 XWB are composed of CFRP. The physic of supersonic flow and
its design are completely different from that of subsonic flow, about
as great as the difference between civil and military aircraft. The
unique features of supersonic aircraft design includes variable-
swept/high-swept/delta-wing and thinner wing, canard, more slen-
der fuselage, area ruling, sonic boom, more power-full propulsion
system, variable engine air intake, and the like. Supersonic laminar
flow also looks very interesting, especially for small aircraft.
Although maintenance of laminar flow in a realistic operational
environment has yet to be demonstrated, this concept remains very
promising. A near term, environmentally acceptable supersonic
business aircraft based on this technology with efficient subsonic
overland flight appears quite feasible [10,11].
2. Current and future configuration designs
Prior to reviewing the progress in materials selection for super-
sonic aircrafts, a brief overview of the configuration design for

0261-3069/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.10.001
 Z. Huda, P. Edi / Materials and Design 46 (2013) 552–560 553

supersonic transport (SST) aircrafts is first presented. Typical SST

aircraft configurations are presented in Fig. 1 [11].
The supersonic flight represents a domain in aircraft design
with many challenges and with many remaining opportunities
for conventional and unconventional solutions to long-standing
problems. One of the most significant design parameters for future
supersonic aircraft is the cruise Mach number. Mach numbers of
1.4–1.6 are lower than technically possible, but still provide large
gains in speed relative to current civil aircraft, while appearing
much more feasible in terms of efficiency and environmental im-
pact. Small supersonic aircraft are especially attractive, with re-
duced community noise and more assured markets. The oblique
wing/body configuration (Fig. 2a) appears promising for these low-
er cruise Mach numbers in terms of performance and boom, but
still represents an engineering challenge, while the oblique flying
wing offers the potential for very high efficiency, but likely results
in a prohibitively large aircraft. Fig. 1. Typical configurations for Concorde and next-generation supersonic trans-
The Whitcomb area rule, also called the transonic area rule, is a port (SST) aircrafts [11].
design technique used to reduce an aircraft’s drag at transonic and
components. Sources of discrete damage include hail impact, light-
supersonic speeds, particularly between Mach 0.75 and 1.2. This is
ning strike, transport and handling, and foreign objects [18]. For
one of the most important operating speed ranges for commercial
supersonic aircraft, the flight-cycle conditions are determined by
and military fixed-wing aircraft today, with transonic acceleration
speed at cruise, altitude, flight loads, and spike (or failure) condi-
being considered an important performance metric for combat air-
tions. The SCT aircraft should be designed for a lifetime of approx-
craft, necessarily dependent upon transonic drag. Typical wing
imately 20,000 flight cycles, which for a typical service cycle
planform use for supersonic aircraft is double-delta wing (Fig. 2b).
The primary advantage of the delta wing is that, with a large en-
ough angle of rearward sweep, the wing’s leading edge will not
contact the shock wave boundary formed at the nose of the fuse-
lage as the speed of the aircraft approaches and exceeds transonic
to supersonic speed [12].
Future high-speed supersonic aircrafts or the hypersonic air-
crafts are being designed with ability to cruise at speeds >4.0 Mach
[13,14]. The configuration design of the hypersonic aircrafts must
take into consideration not only stresses but also the compressibil-
ity effects, ground ambient exposure and erosion effects due to
weather conditions. As regards the compressibility effects, efforts
are being made to design supersonic biplane with half-wedge wing
resulting in reduced sonic boom and pressure drag [1]. Recently
(2011), studies on erosion effects on the structure of supersonic
aircraft have been made by Gohardani; who has suggested tech-
niques to improve configuration design by altering geometrical
parameters of the aircraft structure for avoiding erosion effects
on advanced future supersonic aircrafts [15].

3. Operating conditions and materials selection for structure

Fig. 2a. The oblique flying wing concept in supersonic aircraft.
3.1. Operating conditions

3.1.1. Environmental service conditions

An accurate understanding of expected service conditions is
crucial in the selection of structural materials for the supersonic
aircrafts. Additionally, the identification of design criteria, and
the testing and evaluation of structural concepts are of paramount
importance in the materials selection in designing current and fu-
ture aircrafts. The variables that must be considered in designing
both commercial and military high-speed aircraft applications in-
clude: operating stresses and temperatures, loads, ambient envi-
ronmental conditions, moisture and fluid exposures, radiation,
maintenance, and ground handling [16,17]. Exposure to extremes
in temperature (ranging from about 30 °C to 370 °C), moisture
(extreme humidity to desert conditions), and radiation (especially
ultra-violet) can cause degradation of coatings and structural
materials or exacerbate the damaging effects of flight exposure
conditions. Discrete damage events, both on the ground and in
flight, represent a threat to polymeric composite and thin-skinned Fig. 2b. A typical double-delta wing planform in a supersonic aircraft.
554 Z. Huda, P. Edi / Materials and Design 46 (2013) 552–560
represents about 60,000 flight hours [19]. A substantial portion of
this flight cycle will be under supersonic cruise conditions at
speeds between Mach 2 and Mach 2.4.
3.1.2. Loading conditions and design relationships
An aircraft’s structure is subjected to the following types of
loading during flight: (a) tension, (b) compression (that may cause
two failure modes: yielding and buckling), (c) bending, and (d) tor-
sion. For supersonic application, the minimum weight of aircraft
(strength allied to lightness or specific strength) is an important
factor in material selection. It is, therefore, important to consider
design relationships involving weight of aircraft for selecting a
material. These design relationships are given for each type of
loading as follows [20].
3.1.2.1. Tension and its design equation. Under a certain tensile load
until the yield limit is reached, the applied stress on a structural
part (e.g. fuselage of the aircraft) should be considered in relation
to its weight (W). When the interest is to compare specific
strengths of two materials: (a) and (b), the relationship may be ex-
pressed as follows:
ðW ðaÞ =W ðbÞ Þ ¼ ½ðqðaÞ ryðbÞ Þ=ðqðbÞ ryðaÞ Þ
where W(a) is weight of a structural member using material (a), W(b)
is weight of the structural member using material (b), q(a) is density
of material (a), q(b) is density of material (b), ry(a) is yield strength of
material (a), and ry(b) is yield strength of material (b).
3.1.2.2. Compression and its design equation. Under compression, an
aircraft part may fail by buckling; thus an important design
requirement is a high stiffness (Young’s modulus, E) of the mate-
rial. By comparison of two materials (a) and (b), the following com-
pression relationship is useful to the supersonic aircraft designer:
ðW ðaÞ =W ðbÞ Þ ¼ ðqðaÞ =qðbÞ Þ½ðEðbÞ =EðaÞ Þ1=3
where the symbols have their usual meanings.
3.1.2.3. Bending and design equation. Under bending, both tensile
and compressive stresses act on a structural member (e.g. wing
of aircraft); thus the following relationship should be applied when
comparing two materials:
ðW ðaÞ =W ðbÞ Þ ¼ ðqðaÞ =qðbÞ Þ½ryðbÞ =ryðaÞ 1=2
where the symbols have the same meanings as mentioned in Eq. (1).
3.1.2.4. Torsion and design equation. Airframe construction involves
tubes; which is subjected to torsional stresses. Under torsion, the
relationship between two materials may be expressed as follows:
ðW ðaÞ =W ðbÞ Þ ¼ ðqðaÞ sðbÞ =qðbÞ sðaÞ Þ
where s(a) and s(a) are torques acting on materials (a) and (b),
respectively.
Eqs. (1)–(4) enable an aerospace designer to select a material for
a specific aircraft structural part keeping in view the type of load-
ing acting on it. Although Eqs. (1)–(4) provide useful design rela-
tionships in material selection for design of an aircraft, they do
not fulfill complete design requirements; the latter requires appli-
cation of fracture mechanics (design philosophy) which is illus-
trated in Section 3.2.
3.2. Materials selection for structure
The materials selection in safe design for a structural compo-
nent of a supersonic aircraft requires application of design philoso-
phy relationship, as follows [21–23]:
K ¼ K IC ¼ YrðpaÞ1=2 ð5Þ
where K is stress intensity factor, KIC is plane strain fracture tough-
ness, r is the stress acting in a direction normal to the major axis of
a central crack of length 2a (or an edge crack of length a) in the
component, and Y is geometric compliance function describing
the geometry of the structural component. In order to achieve a safe
design, material’s fracture toughness must be so selected as to en-
sure K < KIC (for preventing crack propagation).
In view of the stringent operating conditions in supersonic
flight, it is important to select a combination of high-performance
aluminum alloys, titanium alloys and polymer matrix composites
in the aircraft structure. Aluminum alloys are light, yet strong; tita-
nium alloys have a great thermal stability, strength, and corrosion-
resistance; while polymer matrix composites have excellent
stiffness, lightness and heat resistance (see sub-sections 3.2.1
and 3.2.2). The design of future high-speed supersonic aircrafts
or the hypersonic aircrafts are imposing larger restrictions on the
materials selection; and demand adequate quantification of mate-
rial behavior and performance during different flight conditions. In
particular, the erosion due to weather conditions and other present
particles such as hydrometeors; rain, hail and ice, as well as sand,
ð1Þ volcanic ash and dust resulting from residues in the atmosphere
are eminent as hazardous on the structure of a flying vehicle and
may adversely influence the lifecycle of the structure [15].
Materials Selection Charts (e.g. Ashby chart) should be referred
to select materials for structural parts of a supersonic aircraft
[24,25]. An Ashby plot useful for a stiff, light part (of an aircraft)
would have Young’s modulus on one axis and density on the other
axis, with one data point on the graph for each candidate material.
On such a plot, it is easy to find not only the material with the high-
est stiffness or that with the lowest density, but that with the best
ratio (E/q). Traditional Materials Selection Charts are usually 2-
dimensional; and hence are not really robust for design of ad-
ð2Þ vanced supersonic aircrafts. Recently (2011), Ashby has reported
the development of an advanced 3-dimensional Materials Selec-
tion Chart that takes into consideration Young’s modulus-Den-
sity-Fracture Strength simultaneously on the single chart [26];
this chart enables a designer to accurately and efficiently select
materials for design of advanced supersonic aircrafts.
Today’s aerospace designers are expected to efficiently select
materials for application in different parts of the aircraft to be de-
ð3Þ signed. A remarkable progress in this regard has been made
through the development of computer-based and web-based
materials-selection systems; these IT-based systems (e.g. CES Selec-
tor) enable an aerospace designer to efficiently select materials for
current and future supersonic aircrafts [27–29].
3.2.1. Materials selection for structures for speeds up to 2.0 Mach
ð4Þ Usually the temperatures on a supersonic transport aircraft
(SSTA) flying at about 1.8 Mach speed are below 100 °C so both
the aluminum and CFRP composites laminates can be selected to
build the fuselage of SST aircrafts. As regards the complexity of fab-
rication and its cost, aerospace aluminum alloys should be pre-
ferred over composites for SCTAs flying at speeds up to 1.8 Mach.
The design of solution heat treatment of the aerospace Al alloys
play an important role is strengthening the alloys for supersonic
applications [30]. The heat-treated aluminum alloys: 2024-T81,
T6, T62, or T81 are suitable for extruded members. In particular,
the alloys: 2014-T6, 2024, and 2618-T61 can be employed for
forged products located in the heat-affected areas of aircraft.
Table 1 enables an aerospace designer to select some aerospace
aluminum alloys for supersonic applications at speeds up to 2.0
Mach [31,32].
It is evident from the data in Table 1 that although the 2219-T87
aluminum alloy is easy-to-fabricate (10% elongation at break), its
 Z. Huda, P. Edi / Materials and Design 46 (2013) 552–560 555

Table 1 Table 2
Densities and tensile mechanical properties of some aluminum alloys for application Aircraft skin temperatures at various speeds.
in SCT aircrafts [31,32].
Speed (Mach number) Skin temperature (°C)
Alloy Density Yield UTS Elongation
2.0 100
(g/cm3) strength (MPa) at
2.5 150
(MPa) break (%)
3.0 200
2024-T81 2.78 450 485 6 3.5 300
2024-T86 2.78 440 515 6 4.0 370
2090-T83 2.59 483 520 5
2219-T87 2.84 393 476 10
8090-T651 2.53 360 465 6.2
7075-T6 2.81 505 575 11 Table 3
New type 2-mm n/a 424 555 12.3 Tensile mechanical properties of three classes of CFRP composites.
Al–Zn–Mg–Sc–Zr alloy
Tensile mechanical Standard Intermediate High
properties modulus modulus modulus CFRP
CFRP CFRP
low yield strength restricts its use for modern supersonic applica- Tensile strength 3450– 3450–6200 MPa 3450–5520 MPa
tions even below 2.0 Mach. However, the easy-to-fabricate 7075- 4830 MPa
T6 alloy and the new (heat-treated) type 2-mm Al–Zn–Mg–Sc–Zr Young’s modulus (E) 220–241 GPa 290–297 GPa 345–448 GPa
alloy (with the highest (12%) elongation at break) have promising Elongation at break 1.5–2.2% 1.3–2.0% 0.7–1.0%

strengths for modern SCT aircrafts [32,33]. In particular, honey-

comb panel frames of SCT aircrafts are predominantly made from
7075-T6 alloy; which are machined from plate to eliminate corner
joints. The aluminum honeycomb can also be used in the beaded
areas of skin doublers, to help stiffen the fuselage skin. At elevated
temperatures, 2024-T81 foil provides higher strength than is ob-
tained in work hardened alloys, such as 5052-H39 and 5056-
H39. Since lithium is the least dense elemental metal, the alloying
of Li with Al offers the promise of substantially reducing the
weight of aerospace alloys. For instance, 2090-T651 can be used
in fuselage bulkhead webs and internal framework parts. Another
lightweight Al–Li alloy is 8090-T651 with melting range 600–
655 °C. Consequently this material could be used to build the
extendable nose.
It is important to design the skeleton of the supersonic aircraft
strong enough, light that can withstand the high pressures exerted
on it. An ideal material for this application is titanium alloy: Ti–
6Al–4V owing to its excellent corrosion resistance, machinability,
and the strength-to-weight ratio [34,35]. The high melting point
of titanium (1668 °C) ensures that the heat which is caused by
the friction would not have any adverse effects on aircraft skeleton.
Additionally, the very low thermal expansion (8.6 lm m1 K1) at
25 °C for titanium ensures thermal stability of the aircraft during
supersonic operation.
3.2.2. Materials selection for structure for speeds between 2.0 and 4.0
Mach
The supersonic aircraft’s skin temperature is a function of its
speed and environment. The skin temperature drops initially as
the aircraft climbs due to exposure to decreasing ambient air tem-
peratures. As the speed increases above about Mach 1, where the
temperature begins to increase, the skin temperature reaches a
maximum of 120 °C (248 °F) after exposure while cruising at Mach
2.2. (At Mach 2.0, the skin temperature would stay below 100 °C
(212 °F); at Mach 2.4, it would reach 150 °C (302 °F.) During des-
cent, the reverse occurs. Thus high temperatures rise (>370 °C)
may occur in the structure of the hypersonic aircrafts flying at high
speeds (>4.0 Mach) (see Table 2).
The data in Table 2 clearly indicates that high-strength heat-
resistant composite materials should be employed for current
supersonic aircrafts flying at speeds in the range of 2.5–4.0 Mach.
For example, the SR-71 Blackbird jet could fly continuously at Mach
3.1 while some parts were heated up to above 315 °C (600 °F).
Commercially available state-of-the-art high-temperature carbon
fiber reinforced polymers (CFRPs), such as graphite fiber/PMR-15
and graphite fiber/PMR-11-55, are capable of withstanding thou-
sands of hours of use at temperatures between 290 and 345 °C.
Both SCTAs and military aircrafts are made of CFRP. For instance,
commercial airliners such as the Boeing 787 Dreamliner operate
much more efficiently and with lower fuel costs due to the use
of CRFP.
The data in Table 3 can be used to select a suitable CFRP for
supersonic aircrafts as follows. The higher the elastic modulus (E)
of a CFRP, more suitable it is for higher Mach speeds. The advanced
SST aircrafts with cruise speeds exceeding 4.0 Mach require the
development of advanced aerospace alloys and composites with
high heat-resisting capability, fatigue resistance, durability and
specific strength/low weight [5].
Having discussed the operating conditions in supersonic air-
crafts and temperature capabilities of various aerospace materials,
the specific materials for each part of the SCT aircraft are now se-
lected. Fig. 3 indicates that fuselage skin of the SST aircraft, cursing
at speed around 2.2 Mach, requires a material resistant to long-
term creep at temperatures ranging from 100 to 130 °C. A suitable
cost-effective material, for this application, may be the 2650 alu-
minum alloy; which presents such properties at relatively high
temperatures (130 °C = 0.43Tmelting) [36]. Exposure to tempera-
tures ranging from 100 to 130 °C during the supersonic flying
phase, using the 2650-T8 alloy, showed that the material did not
deform by more than 0.1% under a 150 MPa stress during the
60,000 h service life.
It is evident from Fig. 3 that different parts of the aircraft are
heated up to different temperatures; hence different materials
should be used in the different parts of the aircraft. In particular,
the temperature rises at the nose and around wings are significantly
higher than along the fuselage. Thus the commercially available
high-temperature CFRP (such as graphite fiber/PMR-15, graphite fi-
ber/PMR-11-55) should be selected for use in the fuselage of the SCT
aircraft structures. However, the nose and around the wings (requir-
ing better heat-resistant material) should be made by using ad-
vanced CFRP. For example, the carbon fiber reinforced epoxy
possesses excellent specific strength (450 GPa/kg/m3) (see Fig. 4)
[37]; and is recommended for speeds in the range of 2.5–3.5 Mach.
Today’s high-speed supersonic flights demand robust materials
that can handle thermal extremes; for example, military aircraft
require thousands of hours of service from engine nozzles that
see up to 399 °C (750 °F). For such applications, high-performance
composites have been developed; these composites include polyi-
mides, bismaleimides (BMIs), cyanate esters (CEs), benzoxazines
and phthalonitriles [38]. In particular, polyimides, bismaleimides
(BMIs), cyanate esters (CEs), and benzoxazines possess excellent
556 Z. Huda, P. Edi / Materials and Design 46 (2013) 552–560
Fig. 3. Predicted equilibrium skin temperatures for Mach 2.2 and 2.4 SCT aircrafts.
Fig. 4. Plot of density normalized stiffness versus strengths for lightweight
aerospace materials [37].
temperature capabilities; and hence they are recommended for
speeds above 3.5 Mach. The phthalonitrile resin system (graphite
fiber-phthalonitrile composite) developed (2002) at the Naval Re-
search Laboratory, Washington DC, USA, has the ability to survive
elevated temperature exposures up to 371 °C (700 °F) for extended
periods of time [39]. This is in contrast to the epoxy-based systems
used in the Naval aircraft that, depending on the moisture content
of the resin, lose their rigidity or shear strength as temperatures
approach 150 °C (302 °F). For the short exposures times typical of
missile applications, high-temperature tension tests demonstrated
that graphite fiber composites fabricated using the phthalonitrile
resin system can retain their tensile strength to temperatures
approaching 538 °C (1000 °F). Epoxy-based graphite fiber-rein-
forced composites, by comparison, start to lose their tensile
strength rapidly at temperatures around 260 °C (500 °F) for similar
short time exposures (Fig. 5). It is evident from Fig. 5 that the ulti-
mate tensile strength (UTS) of graphite–epoxy drops nearly 50% at
316 °C. On the other hand, the graphite–phthalonitrile does not
suffer significant degradation until temperatures are above
482 °C; this is why this material is specially recommended for
application in nose and around wings of the supersonic aircraft
for speeds around 3.5 Mach.
3.2.2.1. A material-selection tool/philosophy applied to wing of a
military aircraft. Having established the quantitative aspects the
Fig. 5. A comparison of normalized ultimate strengths of graphite–epoxy and
graphite–phthalonitrile unidirectional composites [38].
effects of supersonic speed on the stringent requirements for mate-
rials selection for high-speed supersonic aircrafts in the preceding
sub-section, the material selection tool: Weighted Relative Property
Rating Procedure is now applied for selecting material for the wing
of a military aircraft. Although, this procedure relies on selecting a
material with the highest overall rating, the aerospace designers
must also consider use of alternative material if speeds do not ex-
ceed a specified limit. This materials-selection philosophy is illus-
trated in Table 4. In this Weighted Relative Property Rating
procedure for materials selection, only metals have been consid-
ered because composites do not have a sharp yield point (ry). In
Table 4, the weighting factors have been allocated as follows: 10
for mechanical properties, 20 for temperature resistance (if speed
of aircraft is as high as Mach 4.0), and unity for cost.
The analysis of data in Table 4 indicates that stainless steel
should be the optimum choice for the specific application. How-
ever, an aerospace designer must not overlook the outstanding cor-
rosion-resistance capability and low density of titanium alloy;
which should be preferred if the speeds of the supersonic aircraft
does not exceed 3.0 Mach.
In fact, a combination of stainless steel (or composite), titanium
alloy, and high-temperature aluminum alloy (e.g. 2650-T8) can be
selected for the wings of the military aircrafts. This materials-
selection recommendation is justified in view of the wide differ-
ence of temperatures to which the wing is heated up during the
supersonic flight (see Fig. 6).
 Z. Huda, P. Edi / Materials and Design 46 (2013) 552–560 557

Table 4
Weighted relative property rating procedure for selecting a material for wing of a fighter aircraft.

Material ry/q (KIC/ry)2 (mm) E1/3/q Temp. limit (°C) Cost (£/ton) Overall rating [10A + 10B + 10C + 20D+(1  E)]/51
Abs. Rel. = A Abs. Rel. = B Abs. Rel. = C Abs. Rel. = D Abs. Rel. = E
Al alloy 1 130 0.64 16.5 1.00 1.50 1.0 150 0.38 13.100 0.134 0.683
Al alloy 2 204 1.00 2.1 0.13 1.50 1.0 150 0.38 14.000 0.142 0.583
Ti alloy 196 0.96 4.6 0.27 1.06 0.71 300 0.75 98.000 1.000 0.674
Stainless steel 115 0.56 12.3 0.75 0.75 0.50 400 1.00 10.900 0.111 0.764

take with good efficiency and operating characteristics should be

Fig. 6. The wide temperature-differences within the wings during a military
supersonic flight [2].
3.2.3. Materials selection for structure of future supersonic/hyper
aircrafts
Future supersonic/hypersonic aircrafts are being designed to
cruise at speeds beyond 5.0 Mach; which may heat up the struc-
ture to a temperature above 400 °C (see Table 2) [14]. This operat-
ing condition demands the development of advanced composites
that can withstand high temperature gradients. Recently (2010),
Lee and Kim have reported the development of functionally graded
materials (FGMs) that are made up of ceramic and metal; and can
provide thermal protection resulting from large temperature gradi-
ents [8]. In these FGMs, the ceramic plays the role of withstanding
significant heat conduction while the metal withstands the signif-
icant degree of toughness in a high-temperature environment.
These functionally graded composites are recommended for appli-
cation in skin panels of the advanced/future supersonic aircrafts.
Future supersonic aircrafts’ designs also call to take into consider-
ation structural materials with excellent resistance to lightening-
strike damage. A remarkable progress in this regards has recently
(2011) been made by Kawakami and Feraboli; who have reported
the development of a mesh-protected carbon fiber reinforced poly-
mer (CFRP) [40]. The mesh-protected CFRP can be a potential can-
didate for use in the structure of advanced current and future
supersonic aircrafts. The authors also recommend phenolic resins
to be developed for use with non-flammable fiber reinforced com-
posites for use in the structures of future/advanced supersonic
aircrafts.
a solution to reduce propulsion system drag is presented in Fig. 7.
Recently (2011), Gohardani and co-workers have reported chal-
lenges in future aircraft propulsion; and have suggested a com-
bined distributed propulsion technology with an electric aircraft
concept [41]. It is also important to reduce jet noise significantly
while maintaining a high specific thrust [42]. This should help in
the development of turbofan engines that are quiet on takeoff
and efficient at supersonic cruise. The principle of noise suppres-
sion is reduction of the convective Mach number of the turbulent
eddies that cause intense downward radiation; the more subsonic
the eddies become, the less noise is radiated to the far field. Flight
conditions expected for the engines of the future SCT aircraft
would be more severe than current applications. The more-severe
conditions are driven largely by design requirements for low NOx
emissions combustors and low-noise exhaust nozzles [43]. Thus
the future trends in supersonic propulsion system require develop-
ment of more energy-efficient engines with high compressor exit
and turbine inlet temperatures (TITs), together with bypass ratios
that are significantly higher than typical supersonic-capable en-
gines [44].
The operating temperatures in the compressor section are usu-
ally in the range of 500–600 °C; and consequently high-specific-
strength corrosion-resistant titanium alloys remain an optimum
choice for this application. The operating temperatures in the tur-
bine section of current supersonic aircrafts are in the range of
1400–1500 °C; and this application necessitates the selection of
heat-resistant nickel-base superalloys. However the temperature
conditions would be more stringent in the turbine section of the
future high-thrust supersonic aircrafts. Thus, advanced high-per-
formance materials are required to be developed by metallurgists
for hot-sections of future supersonic aircrafts.
4.2. Materials selection for hot sections of the engine for current
supersonic aircrafts
The conditions of heat, stresses, and corrosive environment are
very aggressive is the hot sections of the supersonic aircraft’s en-
gines; and consequently materials with high creep resistance, ten-
sile strength, microstructural stability, and resistances to cyclic
fatigue, thermal fatigue, and hot corrosion are needed to be se-
lected/developed [45]. The temperatures in the hot-sections (par-
ticularly, combustor and turbine sections) of the aircraft engine
of a supersonic aircraft are very high (1400–1650 °C). The hot sec-
tion of current supersonic aircrafts’ engines are usually made of

4. Materials selection for the engine

4.1. The engine’s propulsion system and materials

The economic viability of a future supersonic transport aircraft

requires ambitious aerodynamic performance. Owing to its large
impact on aircraft performance, the aerodynamic design of the fu-
ture supersonic transport aircraft propulsion system is of utmost
importance to overall aircraft efficiency. A low cowl angle air in- Fig. 7. Schematic layout of the propulsion system in a supersonic aircraft engine.
558 Z. Huda, P. Edi / Materials and Design 46 (2013) 552–560
nickel-base and cobalt-base superalloys; which include: mechani-
cally alloyed (MA) superalloys (e.g. MA6000), powder metallurgy
(P/M) superalloys (e.g. P/M IN-792), single crystal (SC) superalloys
(e.g. TMS-75, Rene’N6, CMSX-lfl, etc.), directionally solidified (DS)
superalloy blades, Hastelloy X, Haynes 188, and the like [46–50].
4.3. Materials selection for hot sections of the engine for future
supersonic aircrafts
An optimum choice for current aircraft-engine’s compressor-
blades (operating around 600 °C) is a high-performance titanium
alloy; but they are not suitable for application in future high-
speed/hypersonic aircrafts-engines’ compressor blade since this
component would operate at temperatures exceeding 600 °C
thereby requiring superalloys to be used) However, superalloys
are heavy alloys with lower specific strength (strength-to-weight
ratio) as compared to titanium alloys. This difficulty in material
selection for future supersonic aircrafts can be overcome by select-
ing titanium aluminides; which are attractive alternatives to
superalloys for temperature applications in the range of 600–
850 °C by virtue of their high strength-to-density ratio [51].
The future supersonic aircrafts would be designed with greater
turbine efficiency that would consequently demand materials (for
the hot sections) with a higher temperature capability than current
nickel and cobalt alloys since thermal efficiency of a gas-turbine is
a direct function of the turbine inlet temperature (TIT). In this re-
gard, Perepezko (2009) has proposed use of alloys with higher
melting temperatures (>2500 °C) (such as molybdenum-based al-
loys) for future advanced aircraft engines operating at higher tur-
bine inlet temperatures (TIT > 1600 °C) [52]. This technological
challenge for future trend is also evident in Fig. 8; which illustrates
the development of advanced superalloys in the temperature
capacity of the alloys since 1940.
Fig. 9 not only focuses on current nickel-based superalloys for
aircraft engines’ applications, but also demonstrates the need for
developing new energy-efficient superalloys, such as Mo-based
superalloys for achieving further technological gains. In view of
the very high TIT in advanced engines, materials scientists must
also endeavor to develop ceramic matrix composites with ade-
quate toughness for future energy-efficient supersonic-aircrafts’
engines. In this regard, a good progress has been very recently
(2012) been reported by Boyce; who has suggested potential for
using ceramic with added aluminum in a superalloy to achieve
Fig. 8. Plot showing past and future trends in the development of superalloys with
increasing temperature capabilities.
higher operating temperatures in aircraft engines [53]. This new
materials (after full investigation) can be a potential candidate in
future supersonic aircrafts’ engines.
4.4. Thermal barrier coatings
For high-thrust current and future supersonic aircraft engines,
advanced alloys with thermal barrier coating (TBC) and environ-
mental coatings are required for the combustor liners and turbine
vanes and blades, and turbine and compressor disks [54]. A thermal
barrier coating (TBC) is a multi-layer coating system that consists of
an insulating ceramic outer layer (top coat) and a metallic inner
layer (bond coat) between the ceramic and the substrate. The func-
tion of the ceramic topcoat is to insulate the metallic substrate from
high surface temperature; thereby lowering the components tem-
perature and reducing the oxidation and hot corrosion of bond coat-
ings, while simultaneously reducing cyclic thermal strains [54,55].
A cost-effective method to apply an oxide TBC to the hot-sec-
tion components is by electrophoretic deposition (EPD). Fig. 9 illus-
trates a typical EPD coating system in a high-pressure turbine
blade for an aircraft engine [56,57]. Recently, Kitazawa and co-
workers (2010) have reported that a temperature gradient of
150 °C can be achieved by using a ceramic TBC (Y2O3–ZrO2 top-
coat) on superalloy components [58].
4.4.1. A unique philosophy to extend component lifetimes of future
high-speed supersonic aircrafts
Future high-speed supersonic aircrafts’ engines would require
more energy-efficient ceramic thermal and environmental barrier
coatings (TEBCs) to protect engine hot-section components in the
harsh combustion environments, and to extend component life-
times. Now, a unique aerospace-material philosophy is presented
that can make TBCs more energy efficient for application in future
supersonic aircrafts. The supersonic aircrafts are exposed to ex-
tremes in temperature (ranging from about 30 °C to 370 °C) dur-
ing flight. In order to take advantage of the ground ambient
operating condition. The temperature outside the aircraft at
55,000 feet is many degrees below 0 °C. This cold air can be
exploited to take an engineering advantage, as follows. It is sug-
gested to make a layer of no more than 2 cm before the ceramic
coating of the TBC; which will have cold air in it. A machine will
suck air from outside and will bring this air through the compres-
sor section into this special coating in the combustor section of the
engine. The air will be released when it reaches a certain temper-
ature and after that ‘‘new’’ cold air will be sucked in. This way the
structural parts of the engine’s hot-sections will not suffer from
overheating and consequently they will ‘‘live’’ longer. Hence, the
outside part of the engine could be built with the same material
as the fuselage.
5. A new materials selection guide/table for supersonic aircrafts
Having discussed pros and cons of various aerospace materials,
a new table is now developed that enables an aerospace designers
to select appropriate materials in design of current and future
supersonic aircrafts cruising at speeds with various Mach number
ranges. This materials-selection guide is presented as Table 5.
It is evident from Table 5 that the selection of materials for var-
ious sections of a supersonic aircraft not only depends on whether
it is a structural part or an engine component but also on the cruise
speed of the aircraft. It is worth noting that high-performance tita-
nium alloys remain the best choice for both engine (compressor)
and structure (skeleton) owing to their exceptional specific
strengths, corrosion resistance, and moderate-temperature ther-
mal stability.
 Z. Huda, P. Edi / Materials and Design 46 (2013) 552–560 559

Fig. 9. Illustration of a typical coating system in a high-pressure turbine blade. Clockwise, a TBC coated high-pressure turbine blade, view from top showing the cooling
systems; and schematic profile temperature, note the drop of temperature close to the blade surface due to the presence of a thin cooling air film [58].

Table 5
A new materials selection guide for designing current and future supersonic aircrafts.

Aircraft Current supersonic with cruise
part speed up to 2.0 Mach
Possible material(s) to be selected
Structure Fuselage: Al: 2090-T651; 7075-T6;
8090-T651 (nose)
Skeleton: Ti–6Al–4V or other Ti
Wings: commercial grade CFRP
Engine Compressor: Ti alloy
Combustor & Turbine TBC coated
superalloys: SC alloys, DS blades; P/
M IN-792 disc, and others
Current supersonic with cruise speed: 2.0–4.0 Mach
Possible material(s) to be selected
Fuselage: CFRP: PMR-15, PMR-11-55, or similar high-
modulus composites; or new type 2-mm Al–Zn–Mg–Sc–Zr
alloy
Skeleton: high perf. Ti alloy
Wings: CFRP: PMR-15, PMR-11-55, or similar composites;
or Ti alloy
Compressor: Ti–6Al–2Sn–4Zr–6Mo or similar Ti alloy
Combustor & turbine TBC coated Ni-base superalloys: SC
alloys (TMS-75, Rene’N6, CMSX-lfl), MA superalloys; DS
blades; P/M IN-792 disc, or advanced alloys
Future hypersonic with cruise speed above 4.0 Mach
Possible material(s) to be selected
Fuselage: polyimides, BMIs, CEs, graphite fiber–
phthalonitrile, or FGM (ceramic–metal composite)
Skeleton: titanium aluminides, or high perf. Ti
Alloy wings: mesh-protected CFRP, polyimides, BMIs,
CEs, or stainless steel, or Ti alloy
Compressor: advanced Ti alloy
Combustor & Turbine TEBC coated superalloys: Mo-
based superalloys; or aluminum-added ceramic
composite; or other advanced material

In order to select appropriate materials for various section of a
supersonic aircraft, Table 5 should be referred keeping in view
materials-properties data (see Figs. 4 and 5). For example, the
selection of CFRP for application in fuselage and wing of supersonic
aircrafts cruising at speeds 2–4 Mach and above (see Table 5)
should be made with reference to Figs. 4 and 5. Although Ni-base
superalloys should be selected for the hot-section components of
engines of current supersonic aircrafts, the selection of material
for the hot section of future hypersonic aircrafts requires use of ad-
vanced Mo-based superalloys or Al-added ceramic composite.
6. Conclusions
The materials selection in design of the structure and engine
along with the configuration designs of current and next-genera-
tion supersonic aircrafts have been reviewed; and the following
conclusions have been drawn.
(a) It has been emphasized that an accurate understanding of
expected service conditions (including operating stresses
and temperatures, compressibility effects, ambient environ-
mental conditions, moisture and fluid exposures, radiation,
lightening-strike, maintenance, ground handling etc.) is cru-
cial in the selection of structural and engine materials for the
current and future supersonic aircrafts.
(b) The materials-selection tool: Weighted Relative Property Rat-
ing procedure, has been applied and appropriate recommen-
dations have been made to use stainless steel, composites,
titanium alloy and high-temperature aluminum alloys in
various structural parts of supersonic aircrafts.
(c) Materials selection for engine components has also been
critically considered and appropriate recommendations
have been made to use specific advanced superalloys and
titanium aluminides for current and future supersonic air-
crafts’ engines.
(d) A new aerospace-material philosophy has been presented
that can make TBCs more energy efficient for application
in future supersonic aircrafts.
(e) A unique materials-selection chart/Table has also been
developed that enables an aerospace designers to select
appropriate materials in design of current and future super-
sonic aircrafts cruising at speeds with various Mach number
ranges.
References
[1] Campanile G, Prisco A, Squillace A, Bitondo C, Dionoro G, Buonadonna P, et. al.
FSW of AA2139-T8 Butt joints for aeronautical applications. In: Proceedings of
the institution of mechanical engineers, Part L: Journal of materials: design and
applications, vol. 225(2); 2011. p. 103–10.
560 Z. Huda, P. Edi / Materials and Design 46 (2013) 552–560
[2] Huda Z, Zaharinie T, Min GJ. Temperature effects on material behavior of
aerospace aluminum alloys for subsonic and supersonic aircrafts. J Aerospace
Eng 2010;23(2):124–8.
[3] Mangonon PL. The principles of materials selection for engineering
design. New York (USA): Prentice Hall; 1999.
[4] Kun Z, Sheng-long D, Shou-jie Y, et al. Development of a new creep resistant
Al–Cu–Mg–Ag type alloy. J Aeronaut Mater 2006;26(3):251–7.
[5] Pantelakis S, Kyrsanidi A, El-Magd E, et al. Creep resistance of aluminum alloys
for the next generation supersonic civil transport aircrafts. Theor Appl Fract
Mech 1999;31(1):31–9.
[6] Anderson JD. Aircraft performance and design. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1999.
[7] Soutis C. Fiber reinforced composites in aircraft construction. Prog Aerospace
Sci 2005;41(2):143–51.
[8] Lee S-L, Kim J-H. Thermal post-buckling and the stability boundaries of
structurally damped functionally graded panels in supersonic airflows.
Compos Struct 2010;92(2):422–9.
[9] Subawi H. A practical method for repairing disbonded skin in aircraft panels.
In: Proceedings of the institution of mechanical engineers, Part L: Journal of
materials: design and applications, vol. 223(4); 2009. p. 161–8.
[10] Edi P, Fielding JP. Civil-transport wing design concept exploiting new
technologies. J Aircraft, AIAA 2006;43(4):932–40.
[11] Yoshida K. Supersonic drag reduction technology in the scaled supersonic
experimental airplane project by JAXA. 2009; 45(4–5): 124–46.
[12] Guan J, Sritharan SS. A problem of hyperbolic-elliptic type conservation laws
on manifolds that arises in delta-wing aerodynamics. Int J Contemp Math Sci
2008;3:721–37.
[13] Brezillon J, Carrier G, Laban M. Multidisciplinary optimization of supersonic
aircraft including low-boom considerations. J Mech Des
2011;133(10):105001–9.
[14] Dittrich R, Longo JMA, Carrier G, et al. Multi-disciplinary analysis and
optimization of hypersonic transport aircrafts. In: Proceedings of the 6th
european symposium on aerothermodynamics for space vehicles, held
Versailles, France, 3–6 November; 2008.
[15] Gohardani O. Impact of erosion testing aspects on current and future flight
conditions. Prog Aerospace Sci 2011;47(4):280–303.
[16] Liaquat I, Gautam SN, Daniel P, et al. Environmentally conscious wing design
for the medium altitude long endurance unmanned aerial vehicle. In: ASME;
Proceedings of the ASME international manufacturing science and engineering
conference, West Lafayette, USA; 2009.
[17] McCarty JE, Wilson DR. Advanced composite stabilizer for Boeing 737 Aircraft.
In: Proceedings of the 6th conference on fibrous composites in structural
design AMMRC, TELAMS publications; 1983.
[18] Blohm C. Advanced composites structures: in service experience in the view of
a carrier. In: Proceeding of the workshop on long-term aging of materials and
structures, National Materials Advisory Board, National Research Council,
Washington, D.C., August 10–12, 1994.
[19] Brunner MD. MDC presentation on high speed civil transport. In: Proceeding of
the workshop on long-term aging of materials and structures, National
Materials Advisory Board, National Research Council, Washington (D.C.),
August 10–12, 1994.
[20] Lopes JCO. Materials selection for aeronautical structural application. Sci
Technol Mater (Ciência Tecnologia dos Materiais) 2008;20(3/4):78–82.
[21] Huda Z, Bulpett R, Lim KY. Design against fracture and failure. Switzerland/
USA: Trans Tech Publications; 2011.
[22] Huda Z, Bulpett R. Materials science and design for engineers. Switzerland/
USA: Trans Tech Publications; 2012.
[23] Hertzberg RW, Vinci RP, Hertzberg JL. Deformation and fracture mechanics of
engineering materials. 5th ed. USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.; 2012.
[24] Ashby MF. Materials selection in mechanical design, 3rd ed. Burlington
(Massachusetts): Butterworth-Heinemann; 1999. ISBN: 0-7506-4357-9.
[25] Granta Design. Materials decision support (software); 2012. <http://
www.grantadesign.com>.
[26] Ashby MF. Materials property charts, 4th ed. In: Materials selection in
mechanical design. USA: Elsevier Science Publications; 2011. p. 57–96
[chapter 4].
[27] Yuan-pei L, Qing-chun M, Feng L, et al. Aircraft design material-selection
method based on MAUT theory. J Aeronaut Mater 2010;30(3):88–94.
[28] Yanpei L, Qixiang J, Zhidong G, et al. Development of aircraft-design material-
selection expert system. J Beijing Univ: Aeronaut Astronaut
2010;36(11):1358–64.
[29] Lan Y, Guan Z, Jiao Q, et al. A web-based computer-aided material-selection
system for aircraft design. J Comput 2011;6(5):976–83.
[30] Beddoes J. Design of solution heat treatments for aerospace alloys. Can Metall
Q 2011;20(3):215–21.
[31] Calister WD, Rethwisch DG. Materials science and engineering, 8th ed. John
Wiley & Sons (Asia Edition); 2011.
[32] Deng Y, Yin Z, Duan J, Zhao K, Tang B, He Z. Evolution of microstructure and
properties in a new type 2 mm Al–Zn–Mg–Sc–Zr alloy sheet. J Alloys Compd
[21.12.11].
[33] Tajally M, Huda Z, Masjuki HH. A comparative analysis of tensile and impact-
toughness behavior of cold-worked and annealed 7075 aluminum alloy. Int J
Impact Eng 2010;37:425–32.
[34] Donachie Jr MJ. TITANIUM: A Technical Guide. Metals Park (OH): ASM
International; 1988
[35] Jaffery SI, Mativenga PT. Assessment of the machinability of Ti–6Al–4V alloy
using the wear map approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2009;40(7-8):687–96.
[36] Majimel J, Casanove MJ, Molénat G. A 2xxx aluminum alloy crept at medium
temperature: role of thermal activation on dislocation mechanisms. Mater Sci
Eng, A 2004;380(1–2):110–6.
[37] Williams JC, Starke Jr EA. Progress in structural materials for aerospace
systems. Acta Mater 2003;51(19):5775–99.
[38] McConnell Vicki P. Resins for the hot zone, Part II: BMIs, CEs, benzoxazines and
phthalonitriles. In: high-performance composites. September 2009. <http://
www.compositesworld.com>.
[39] Jones HN, Keller TM. High-temperature tensile properties of graphite fiber–
phthalonitrile composites. Washington (DC): United States Naval Research
Laboratory; 2002. http://www.nrl.navy.mil/research/nrl-review/2002/
featured-research/jones/.
[40] Kawakami H, Feraboli P. Lightning strike damage resistance and tolerance of
scarf-repaired mesh-protected carbon fiber composites. Compos Part A: Appl
Sci Manuf 2011;42(9):1247–62.
[41] Gohardani AS, Doulgeris G, Singh R. Challenges of future aircraft propulsion: a
review of distributed propulsion technology and its potential application for
the all electric commercial aircraft. Prog Aerospace Sci 2011;47(5):369–91.
[42] Papamoschou D. Engine cycle and exhaust configuration for quiet supersonic
propulsion. J Propul Power 2004;20(2):255–62.
[43] Williams JC, Johnson AM. HSCT Aging Engine Issues. In: Proceedings of the
workshop on long-term aging of materials and structures, National Materials
Advisory Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., August 10–12;
1994.
[44] Brear MJ, Kerrebrock JL, Epstein AH. Propulsion system requirements for long
range supersonic aircraft. J Fluids Eng 2006;128(2):370–8.
[45] Boyce MP. Materials; In gas turbine engineering handbook. 4th
ed. USA: Elsevier Science Publications; 2012.
[46] Huda Z. Development of design principles for a creep-limited alloy for turbine
blades. J Mater Eng Perform 1995;4(1):48–53.
[47] Reed RC, Tao T, Warnken N. Alloys-by-design: application to nickel-based
single crystal superalloys. Acta Mater 2009;57(19):5898–913.
[48] Yaoming F, Fayazbakhsh K. Materials selection for hot section aircraft engine
component. In: Mahadevan V, Zhou J, editors. Proceedings of the 2nd
international conference on computer engineering and technology (ICCET
2010): Chengdu, China held 16–18 April; 2010.
[49] Huda Z. Development of heat treatment process for a P/M superalloy for
turbine blades. Mater Des 2007;28(5):1664–7.
[50] Schafrik RE, Williams JC. Jet engine materials; Encyclopedia of materials:
science and technology, 2nd ed.; 2001. p. 4331–38.
[51] Appel F, Paul JDH, Oehring M. Gamma titanium aluminide alloys. New
York: John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
[52] Perepezko JH. The hotter the engine, the better. Science
2009;326(5956):1068–9.
[53] Wolfgang K, Joerg E, Volker A, et al. Research with neutron and synchrotron
radiation on aerospace and automotive materials and components. Adv Eng
Mater 2011;13(8):637–57.
[54] Gurrappa I, Sambasiva RA. Thermal barrier coatings for enhanced efficiency of
gas turbine engines. Surf Coat Technol 2006;201:3016–29.
[55] Sadowski T, Golewski P. Multidisciplinary analysis of the operational
temperature increase of turbine blades in combustion engines by application
of the ceramic thermal barrier coatings (TBCs). Comput Mater Sci
2011;50(4):1326–35.
[56] Padture NP, Gell M, Jordan EH. Thermal barrier coatings for gas-turbine engine
applications. Science 2002;296(5566):280–4.
[57] Boccaccini RA, Zhitomirsky I. Application of electrophoretic and electrolytic
deposition techniques in ceramics processing. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci
2002;6:251–60.
[58] Kitazawa R, Tanaka M, Kagawa Y, Liu YF. Damage evolution of TBC system
under in-phase thermo-mechanical tests. Mater Sci Eng B 2010;173(1–
3):130–4.