A major tool-manufacturing company is considering an expansion of its line of conventional hand tools to include safety tools, capable of being used in areas such as gas leaks where the potential of explosion or fire exists. Conventional irons and steels are pyrophoric (i.e., small slivers or fragments can burn in air, forming sparks if dropped or impacted on a hard surface).
You are asked to evaluate potential materials and processes that might be used to manufacture a nonsparking pipe wrench. This product is to be produced in the same shape and range of sizes as conventional pipe wrenches and possess all of the same characteristic properties (strength in the handle, hardness in the teeth, fracture resistance, corrosion resistance, etc.). In addition, the new safety wrench must be nonsparking (or nonpyrophoric).
Your initial review of the nonferrous metals reveals that aluminum is nonpyrophoric, but lacks the strength and wear resistance needed in the teeth and jaw region of the wrench.
Copper is also nonpyrphoric, but is heavier than steel, and this may be unattractive for the larfer wrenches. Copper-2% beryllium can be age hardened to provide the strength and hardness properties equivalent to the steel that is currently being used for the jaws of the wrench, but the cost of this material is also quite high. Titanium is difficult to fabricate and may not possess the needed hardness and wear resistance. Mixed materials may create an unattractive galvanic corrosion cell. Both forging and casting appear to be viable means of forming the desired shape.
You want to produce a quality product but also wish to make the wrench in the most economical manner possible so that the new line of safety tools is attractive to potential customers.
Suggest some alternative manufacturing systems (materials coupled with companion methods of fabrication) that could be used to produce the desired wrench. What might be the advantages and disadvantages of each? Which of your alternatives would you recommend to your supervisor?