Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract: For mechanically fastened lap-splice joints and butt joints in a fuselage structure the dominant loading condition is introduced by the groundair-ground pressurization cycle. The hoop load is transferred from one skin panel to the next panel by fasteners in a lap joint or a single strap butt joint. The hoop load is offset by eccentricities in the joint, resulting in secondary bending. Secondary bending is highly dependent on the magnitude of the eccentricity and the flexural rigidity of the joint between the fastener rows. The bending stresses can be derived with a one-dimensional Neutral Line Model (NLM) as proposed by Schijve. In the present paper this model is extended to account for load transmission by rivet rows between the outer rows of the joint which was ignored in the original model. Strain gage measurements have indicated that load transmission occurs in these rows. The extended model covers both monolithic and fibre metal laminate materials. It can be applied to a wide range from simple to complicated joints containing rivets or bolt type fasteners. In case of riveted fasteners, the influence of so-called fastener flexibility can be addressed as well. Strain gage measurements on lab specimens and in-service joints have supported the analysis to show the most likely locations for fatigue crack nucleation and growth.
1. INTRODUCTION
A thorough understanding of the stresses at the most critical fastener row is essential in conducting fatigue and damage tolerance analysis of mechanically fastened joints. The critical fastener row location is most susceptible to fatigue crack nucleation and subsequent crack growth. The dominant loading condition for riveted lap-splice joints in an aircraft fuselage structure is introduced by the Ground-Air-Ground (GAG) pressurization cycle. The hoop load is transferred from one skin panel to the next panel by fasteners in a lap joint or a single strap
x1 P L1 a
x2
j=1
x3
j=2
x4
j=3
b L4
L2
L3
w P e
i2 =
P (i = 1,2) EI i
(4)
Ai and Bi are solved using the boundary conditions for the two parts with length L1 and L2 respectively.
x1 = 0 w1 = 0 x1 = L1 and x2 = 0 w2 = w1 e x1 = L1 and x2 = 0 x2 = L2 w2 = 0 dw1 dw2 = dx1 dx2
(6)
( symmetry)
After substitution of Eq. (5) in the in Eq. (6) the constants Ai and Bi of Eq. (5) can be solved. The bending moment Mx is then obtained as:
d 2w M x = EI dx 2
The maximum secondary bending occurs at the first fastener row (x1 = L1). Defining the bending factor kb as:
2 2 6 A kb = bending = Wt = 1 1 P tension Pt
6M c
(7)
(8)
with the hyperbolic function Thi = tanh(iLi) it was shown in [3] that for a long specimen, i.e. L1 significantly larger then L2, the value of Th1 is practically equal to 1. This implies that the effect of the length of the specimen on the secondary bending can be ignored, and the equation reduces to:
kb = 3 1 + 2 2 tanh ( 2 L2 )
(9)
with:
2 =
3 2t 2 E
(10)
The loading conditions at the ends of the specimen, i.e. far away of the overlap region, were also explored in [3]. If the hinged load introduction in is replaced by a fixed clamping (dw/dx1 = 0 at x1 = 0) the difference of the secondary bending at x1 = L1 with the hinged load introduction is negligible. This also applies to a misalignment when the loads P at the two ends of the specimen are applied along slightly shifted parallel lines. Values of the bending factor kb calculated with (9) for different input data are shown in Table I. The data in the first line of the table applies to the geometry of typical specimen dimensions. The load P corresponds to an applied stress level of 100 MPa.
L1 [mm] 200
L2 [mm] 28 18 28
t [mm] 2 1 2
Table I Variation of input data for symmetrical lap-splice joint The results in the table show the following trends: If the row spacing L2 is reduced from 28 mm to 18 mm, the bending factor increases from 1.16 to 1.43 If the sheet thickness is reduced from 2 mm to 1 mm, the bending factor decreases from 1.16 to 0.88 If the Elasticity Modulus is increased from 72000 MPa (Al-alloys) to 210000 MPa (steel) the bending factor increases from 1.16 to 1.49 These trends can be understood as being related to the bending flexibility of the overlap region and the eccentricity in the joint. It may well be expected that similar trends will also
T1 M1
T2 M2
T3 M3 L
t P T3
T1 L
T2
Figure 4 Simple lap-splice joint with load transmission from the upper sheet to the lower sheet causing internal moments
P M1
P-T1
T1
Figure 5 Internal moment as a result of load transfer via the fastener P P P M1 Figure 6 Moment as a result of the load transfer of original neutral line model e1
The loads in the various parts of the joint are indicated in Figure 4. In the elementary neutral line model, the middle row did not contribute to load transmission (T2 = 0) and as a consequence T1 and T3 were both equal to P/2. However, due to fastener flexibility, T1 and PT1 are no longer equal to P/2 because different tension loads occur in the upper and lower segments of the overlap of the joint. As a consequence, an internal moment will be introduced at the fastener rows, M1, M2 and M3, at the three fastener rows respectively. In view of symmetry M3 = M1. The internal moment M1 at the first fastener row is indicated in Figure 5. As mentioned earlier, the loads in the upper and lower sheet are different due to the load transfer associated with different tensile elongations of the upper and lower sheet. In the neutral line model the upper and lower sheets between the 1st and 3rd rivet row, in the overlap region, are assumed to act as an integral beam subjected to secondary bending.
M 1 + T1 M 1 = T1t This moment is associated with the influence of the load transfer of Figure 5 and thus the neutral line model will behave as shown in Figure 6. For the moment in the second and third fastener row using the same principle follows that: M 2 = T2t M 3 = T1t
(13)
t 3 T1 t = 0 2 2
(12)
The original neutral line model calculates the (non-linear) secondary bending moment in a joint and assumes a moment introduced by the eccentricity e1. The influence of the load trasnfer leads to a change of this moment. The changes per fastener row can be written as:
M 1 = M 1 + Pe1 M 2 = M 2 M 3 = M 3 + Pe3
These changes in moments must be taken into account when analyzing the deformations in the joint. Note that for the original neutral line model, T2 = 0, T1 = T3 = P/2 and e1 = e3 = t/2, it follows that Mi = 0. The calculation of T1 and T2 is based on the different elongations of the upper and lower sheetoccuring as a result of fastener tilting. This phenomenon is described here by a linear function between the applied load (P) transmitted by a row of fasteners and the displacement () occurring in the joint due to plastic deformation around the fastener holes.
f =
(14)
(15)
For the lap-splice joint, the symbol is the displacement of the lower sheet at a row relative to the upper sheet, while P is the load associated with the relevant internal moment (T1 or T2). The symbol f is an empirically obtained flexibility constant. For the first and the second row:
1 = f T1 2 = f T2
(16)
The fastener flexibility displacements and the tensile elongations of the upper and lower sheet (Lupper and Llower) must be compatible, see Figure 7.
L+Lupper P T1 T1 L+Llower T2 T2 P
Figure 7 Force distribution when effected by fastener flexibility The tensile elongations follow from the stress strain relation: =
L S load = = L E AE
(17)
L = load with =
L AE
where A is the cross sectional area. For the lap-splice joint in Figure 7 it implies:
Lupper = (P T1 ) Llower = T1
(18)
The compatibility between the tensile elongations and fastener flexibility displacements is easily obtained from Figure 7:
L + Lupper = 1 + (L + Llower ) 2
With L = 28 mm, A = 200 mm2 and E = 72000 N/mm2 the -value is:
(19)
= 1.944 10 6
mm N
f = 3.523 10 5
mm N
(20)
With the above-mentioned value of and f the results for T1 and T2 are:
T1 = 7052 T2 = 5896 This load transmission is illustrated by Figure 8. As a result of the fastener flexibility the first fastener row transmits 35 % (7052 N) of the load P, the second row 30 % (5896 N) and the third row again 35 %.
20000
20000
L1
L2
L3
L4
Figure 8 load transfer in the simple lap-splice joint accounting for fastener flexibility The calculation of the internal moment is entirely dependent on the location of the neutral axis of the lap-splice joint [6]. The internal moment is therefore a function of both the load transfer and the geometric lay-out of the joint. In case of a monolithic joint the neutral line is located at the center of each element of the lap-splice joint. The moments can then be calculated using e1 = -t/2 and Eqn. 13 and 14: M 1 = 5896 Nmm M 2 = 11792 Nmm M 3 = 5896 Nmm
The bending factor was calculated in the previous Section 2.1 for the simple lap joint without considering rivet tilting. The bending factor will now be derived for the same lap splice joint accounting for rivet tilting and load transmission by all fastener rows.
Part 1 L1 P
x1 t e
Part 2 L2 M1
x2
2t
Figure 9 Secondary bending in the simple symmetric lap-splice joint with the internal moments at the first fastener row For Part 1 in Figure 9 the equations for the bending moment and the displacements w(x) are similar to the Eqn. 1 - 4 with the solution given in Eqn. 5. With the condition that w(x1) = 0 for x1 = 0, it is easily found that B1 = 0. The equation for w(x1) thus becomes:
w( x1 ) = A1 sinh(1 x1 )
(21)
(22)
(23)
The boundary conditions at the first fastener row (x1 = L1 and x2 = 0) are:
(w )
x2 x = L 2 2
= wx1
( )
x1 = L1
+ e1
(24)
dw dw = dx x1 = L1 dx x2 =0
(25)
The constants A1, A2 and B2 can now be solved after substitution of Eqns 21 and 23 in Eqns. 24 to 26. With the boundary values of the hyperbolic function written as: Si = sinh( i Li ) Ci = cosh( i Li ) Thi = tanh( i Li )
1 AC 2 1 1
A2 S 2 + B2 C2 +
M 1 =0 P
The most critical bending moment occurring at the first fastener row is obtained as:
d 2w M x1 = L1 = EI dx 2 x1 = L1
(28)
With 1 =
2
2 2 6 A kb = bending = Wt = 1 1 P tension Pt
(29)
Wt
After solving A1 and realizing that t2 = 2t and e = -t/2 for the simple lap-splice joint, a further evaluation leads to:
1 6M 1 1 +3 Pt C2 kb = Th 1+ 2 2 2 Th1
(30)
It should be noted that for M1 = 0, i.e. no fastener flexibility and internal moments, Eqn. 30 reduces to the previous Eqn. 9. Results of the calculations of kb with fastener flexibility (Eqn. 30) are shown in Table II for similar values of L1, L2, t, E used previously. L1 [mm] L2 [mm] 28 18 28 t [mm] 2 1 2 E [N/mm2] f [mm/N] 3.542E-5 5.369E-5 1.214E-5 kb for an applied stress of 100 MPa With f Without f 1.09 1.16 1.39 1.43 0.64 0.88 1.46 1.49
200
72000 210000
Table II Variation of input data for symmetrical lap-splice joint, f calculated using Huth [7] this also effects the load transfer through the fastener rows.
3. RESULTS
In this section results are presented for surface stress levels in two butt splice joints and one in service lap splice joint. Figure 10 shows calculated and measured results of stress levels in an Al-2024 T3 Clad butt splice joint. Only one overlap of the symmetric simple strap joint is shown. The calculations provide a continuous curve of the variation of the stress level along the joint. The strain gage measurements give a number of local stress values only. Outside the overlap the agreement between calculation and measurement is very good. Inside the overlap the agreement is less, but it should be realised that the neutral line model is a one dimensional model which does not take into account the non-homogenous stress distribution in the width direction Figure 11 shows a similar comparison for a fiber metal laminate butt-splice joint. The trends are practically the same as for the Al-2024 T3 Clad butt splice joint, i.e. again a very good agreement outside the overlap area, and a qualitatively correct trend inside the overlap.
350
Butt joint: Figure E-2 Strain gage pattern: Figure E-6 Applied stress: 104 MPa
s.g. 23 250 Strain gage data Neutral line model Surface stress [MPa] 150 s.g. 16 50 s.g. 18 200 220 240 16 17 -150 t1 260 18 280 300 19 20 320 21 22 340 360 23 24 t2 380 400 s.g.19 s.g. 21
-50
Location [mm]
Figure 10 Butt joint results from strain gages at the lower side of the butt splice joint, sheet thickness t1 = 4.0 mm, t2 = 4.0 mm and material Al 2024-T3 Clad
350 300 250 200 150 Surface stress 100 [MPa] 50 0 -50 -100 -150 200
Strain gage data Neutral line model Butt joint: Figure E-2 Strain gage pattern: Figure E-6 Applied stress: 82 MPa Load transfer 40-16-44 s.g. 23
s.g. 16 s.g. 18
s.g. 19
s.g. 21
220
240 16 17 t1
260 18
280
300 19 20
320 21 22
340
360 23 24 t2
380
400
Location [mm]
Figure 11 Butt joint surface stress representation for strain gages at the upper surface, sheet thickness t1 = 4.25 mm, t2 = 4.25 mm and material sheet 1 is Glare 3-6/5-0.5 and sheet 2 is Glare 2B-6/5-0.5
18 16 14 12 10 8 Normal Stress (ksi) 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 0 5000 10000 Applied Load (lbs) 15000 20000 Tensile stress Bending stress Tensile stress (strain gage data) Bending stress (strain gage data) Row A
4. CONCLUSIONS
1. The internal moment concept gives a good representation of the load transfer occurring in multi-row joints. The calculation of the load transfer can be made for complicated lap-splice and butt joints in both monolithic and laminated sheet materials. The calculated and the experimental stress levels agreed very well outside the overlap area of the joints, while indicative results were obtained in the overlap area. The results provide a base for further research into improved fastener flexibility equations and load transfer. 2. The influence of the fastener flexibility is of less importance than previously expected. 3. Adding doublers and stringers do not offer complications. Only those parts adding bending stiffness to the joint need to be taken into account.
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Latin A Ai, Bi ei E f I kb L Mi, Mx Minternal P ti Ti wi W x y Greek Area Constants for solving differential eq. Eccentricity Youngs modulus Fastener flexibility Moment of inertia Bending factor Length Moment Internal moment Applied force Thickness Load transfer Displacement neutral axis Width x-coordinate y-coordinate [mm2] [mm] [mm] [MPa] [mm/N] [mm4] [-] [mm] [Nm] [Nm] [kN] [mm] [kN] [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm]
Stiffness ratio Displacement Displacement of fastener Displacement of sheet Bending stress Bending stress Tensile stress Stiffness ratio
REFERENCE LIST
[1] [2] Gere, J.M. and Timoshenko, S.P. (1991), Mechanics of Materials, Chapman & Hall, London. Hartman, A. and Schijve, J. (1968), Effects of dimensions of riveted lap joints and single-strap butt joints on secondary bending (in Dutch). NLR-TR-68026, Amsterdam, National Aerospace Laboratory Schijve, J. (1972), Some Elementary Calculations on Secondary Bending in Simple Lap Joints, NLR-TR-72036, Amsterdam, National Aerospace laboratory Mller, R.P.G. (1995), An Experimental and Analytical investigation on the Fatigue Behaviour of Fuselage Riveted Lap Joints, The Significance of the Rivet Squeeze Force, and a Comparison of 2024-T3 and Glare 3, Dis. Delft University of Technology
[3] [4]