A Basic Review of Design and Material Selection for Shovel’s body

Authors

• Anggi Buana, Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Indonesia, Kampus Baru UI Depok, West Java, IndonesiaFollow
• Winarto Winarto, Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Indonesia, Kampus Baru UI Depok, West Java, IndonesiaFollow

Abstract

Manual shovels still play an important role in construction and agricultural work, selecting the right material is crucial to obtain a shovel body that has structural reliability, ergonomic efficiency, and sustainability. In this study, a method for selecting the most suitable material will be discussed by combining functional analysis (Ashby's material performance index, and the Multi-Criteria Decision Making approach). From the figure of load, material index is formulated as a reference for performance property requirements. Using data from analysis software and qualitative data, eight performance criteria such as durability, corrosion resistance, cost, and environmental impact are then weighted using the Digital Logic Method to consider the influence of their relationships. Five material candidates from the analysis software are compared based on the normalized property weight value. The results show that AISI 1040 (as rolled) achieves the highest overall score, providing balanced performance and sustainability. From other results, considerations are made for the use of other candidates such as AISI 304 which has advantages in use with extreme corrosion levels but has an expensive price and polyester/E-glass which has advantages in reducing the overall shovel load but has limited strength. Overall, this method provides a clear basic picture in the material selection process in the design of a component, especially in this study the shovel body.

References

1. Afshari, A R & Yusuff, R M 2010, ‘Simple additive weighting approach to personnel selection problem’, International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management.
2. Anojkumar, L, Ilangkumaran, M & Sasirekha, V 2014, ‘Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for pipe material selection in sugar industry’, Expert Systems with Applications,  41, pp.2964–2980.
3. Ashby, M F 2011, Materials Selection in Mechanical Design, 4th edn, Elsevier Ltd, Oxford.
4. Ashby, M F 2012, Materials and the environment: eco-informed material choice, Elsevier, Oxford.
5. Ashby, M F & Cebon, D 1993, ‘Materials selection in mechanical design’, Journal de Physique IV, pp.1–9.
6. Athawale, V M & Chakraborty, S 2012, ‘Material selection using multi-criteria decision-making methods: a comparative study’, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part L: Journal of Materials: Design and Applications, 226, pp.266–285.
7. Bhaskar, A S & Khan, A 2022, ‘Comparative analysis of hybrid MCDM methods in material selection for dental applications’, Expert Systems with Applications, 209.
8. Burgess, S C, Pasini, D, Smith, D J & Alemzadeh, K 2006, ‘A general solution to the material performance index for bending strength design’, Materials and Design, 27, pp.1046–1054.
9. Cabeza, L F, Barreneche, C, Miró, L, Morera, J M, Bartolí, E & Fernández, A I 2013, ‘Low carbon and low embodied energy materials in buildings: a review’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
10. Carlsson, B 1984, ‘The development and use of machine tools in historical perspective’, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 5, pp.91–114.
11. Chatterjee, P & Chakraborty, S 2012, ‘Material selection using preferential ranking methods’, Materials and Design, 35, pp.384–393.
12. Del Rosario, Z 2022, ‘Precision materials indices: materials selection with statistically rigorous reliability analysis’, AIAA Journal, 60, pp.578–586.
13. Duryat, R S 2020, ‘The screwdriver: a basic review on design and material selection’, AIP Conference Proceedings.
14. Epsztein, S R, De Fombelle, M A J, Falher, T, Jouannet, D, Gallone, T & Cauret, L 2014, ‘Substitution of virgin material by recycled material from end-of-life vehicle (ELV)’, Key Engineering Materials, pp.836–843.
15. Farag, M M 2013, Materials and process selection for engineering design, 3rd edn, CRC Press.
16. Freivalds, A 1986a, ‘The ergonomics of shovelling and shovel design—a review of the literature’, Ergonomics, 29, pp.3–18.
17. Freivalds, A 1986b, ‘The ergonomics of shovelling and shovel design—an experimental study’, Ergonomics, 29, pp.19–30.
18. Freivalds, A & Kim, Y J 1990, ‘Blade size and weight effects in shovel design’, Applied Ergonomics.
19. GaneshKumar, P, Ajithkumar, A, Sivalingam, V K, Divya, S, Oh, T H, Pandiaraj, S & Al-Otaibi, J S 2025, ‘Exploring the cost-effective and environmentally friendly energy storage materials for solar desalination: a multi-criteria decision-making framework’, Journal of Energy Storage, 132.
20. Gheorghiță, C & Gheorghiță, V 2015, ‘Materials selection for an engineering application using multiple-criteria decision analysis’, Proceedings in Manufacturing Systems, 10, pp.141–146.
21. Jahan, A, Mustapha, F, Sapuan, S M, Ismail, M Y & Bahraminasab, M 2012, ‘A framework for weighting of criteria in ranking stage of material selection process’, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 58, pp.411–420.
22. Konz, S 2017, Work design: occupational ergonomics, CRC Press.
23. Kou, G, Ergu, D, Lin, C & Chen, Y 2016, ‘Pairwise comparison matrix in multiple criteria decision making’, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 22, pp.738–765.
24. Maleque, M A, Dyuti, S & Rahman, M M 2010, ‘Material selection method in design of automotive brake disc’, World Congress on Engineering.
25. Mardina, Z, Turnbull, R P, Rahimifard, S, Bibb, R & Culmer, P 2025, ‘CM3D: a circular materials multi-criteria decision-making tool for medical devices’, Materials and Design, 254.
26. Montemor, M F 2014, ‘Functional and smart coatings for corrosion protection: a review of recent advances’, Surface and Coatings Technology, 258, pp.17–37.
27. Nurfitrah, A E, Nanda, R & Syahrial, A Z 2025, ‘Design and selection of paddle materials for high-level rowing competition applications using multi-criteria decision analysis’, Indonesian Physical Review, 8, pp.31–47.
28. Vafaei, N, Ribeiro, R A & Camarinha-Matos, L M 2021, ‘Assessing normalization techniques for simple additive weighting method’, Procedia Computer Science, pp.1229–1236.

Recommended Citation

Buana, Anggi and Winarto, Winarto (2026) "A Basic Review of Design and Material Selection for Shovel’s body," Journal of Materials Exploration and Findings: Vol. 5: Iss. 2, Article 6.
DOI: 10.7454/jmef.v5i2.1132
Available at: https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/jmef/vol5/iss2/6