DAMAGE TOLERANCE ANALYSIS OF WING

FUSELAGE ATTACHMENT BRACKET FOR A

MEDIUM SIZE CIVIL TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT

PROJECT REPORT

Submitted by

JAYASURYA.G 812115101014
KAVIYARASAN.J 812115101016
VIJAY FEROZ.A 812115101023

in partial fulfillment for the award of the degree

of
BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
in
AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING

M.A.M. SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

SIRUGANUR,TRICHY

ANNA UNIVERSITY::CHENNAI 600 025

APRIL - 2019
 ANNA UNIVERSITY::CHENNAI 600 025

BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that this project report “DAMAGE TOLERANCE

ANALYSIS OF WING FUSELAGE ATTACHMENT BRACKET FOR A
MEDIUM SIZE CIVIL TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT” is the bonafide work of
“JAYASURYA.G , KAVIYARASAN.J , VIJAY FEROZ.A” carried out the
project work under my supervision.

SIGNATURE SIGNATURE
Dr.K.CHANDRASEKARAN M.E,P.hD., Mr. N.SENTHILKUMAR M.E.,
HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT PROJECT GUIDE
Associate Professor, Assistant Professor,
Aeronautical Engineering, Aeronautical Engineering,
M.A.M School Of Engineering, M.A.M School of Engineering,
Siruganur, Siruganur,
Trichirapalli-621 105 Trichirapalli-621 105

Submitted this Project for Viva voce on________________

_______________ ________________
Internal examiner External examiner
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, we wish to acknowledge our gratitude to the almighty

god and our parents, who had made better opportunities in our life, knowledge
and good health so far. We would like to express thanks to the Correspondent of
our College AlHaj.Er. M.A.Peer Mohamed, for providing better working
environments and educational facilities in a well sophisticated manner.

We convey our heartiest thanks to the respected principal of our college,

Dr.P.RANJITH KUMAR for providing us, the necessary infrastructure for
successful completion of our project.

We are much grateful to Dr.K.CHANDRASEKARAN Head of the

Department, Aeronautical Engineering, for his encouragement, valuable
comments and many innovative ideas in carrying out this project. Without his
timely help, it would have been impossible for us to complete this work.
We acknowledge in no less term the qualified and excellent Assistance
with many innovative ideas rendered by our guide Mr.N.SENTHILKUMAR
we owe a debt of gratitude for his valuable suggestions, kind inspiration and
encouragement
We most sincerely acknowledge the staff members and Technical
Assistant of Department of Aeronautical Engineering for their constant
inspiration and suggestions. We owe a deep gratitude to our friends for their
advice which keeps our spirits high to complete our project.

iii
 ABSTRACT

An aircraft is a complex and high performance mechanical structure, which has

the ability to fly with a very high structural safety record. Generally transport aircraft
undergoes nominal maneuvering flights. Rarely an aircraft will fail due to a static
overload during its service life. For the continued airworthiness of an aircraft during
its entire economic service life, fatigue and damage tolerance design, analysis, testing
and service experience correlation play a pivotal role. During the flight when the
maximum lift is generated, the wings of the aircraft will undergo highest bending
moment as they are the main lifting surfaces. The wing structure is a multi-web box
beam which is attached to the fuselage structure through wing-fuselage attachment
brackets. The bending moment will be maximum at the root of the wing which creates
a large value of stress at this location. The bending moment and shear loads from the
wing are transferred to the fuselage through the attachment joints. The present project
deals with the damage tolerance assessment of this structure for the transfer of loads to
have a safe life of flight in a transport airframe. To be more precise the static load
carrying capability of the wing fuselage attachment bracket is mainly considered for
the analysis procedure. The stress analysis is done by finite element method.
Geometry of the lug attachment joint is generated by CATIA V5 software and later for
analysis; the tools MSC PATRAN and MSC NASTRAN is used.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER NO. TITLE PAGE NO.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii
ABSTRACT iv
LIST OF TABLES viii
LIST OF FIGURES ix

1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1
1.2 INTRODUCTION TO AIRCRAFT 1
STRUCTURE
1.2.1 Major aircraft components 3
1.3 AIRCRAFT MATERIALS 7
1.3.1 Metallic Materials 7
1.3.2 Non Metallic Materials 10
1.4 DAMAGE TOLERANCE 12
1.5 INTRODUCTION TO WING FUSELAGE 14
ATTACHMENT
1.6 FUNDAMENTALS OF FINITE 16
ELEMENT ANALYSIS
1.6.1 Introduction to FEA approach 16
1.6.2 How the FEM works 16
1.6.3 The different stages of FEA 20
1.7 LINEAR STATIC STRESS ANALYSIS 21
2 LITERATURE REVIEW 22
3 FORMULATION OF PROBLEM 27
3.1 PROBLEM DEFINITION 27
3.1.1 Objective of the Present Work 27
3.2 METHODOLOGY 28

v
 3.3 MATERIAL SELECTION AND 30
SPECIFICATION
4 GEOMETRICAL AND FINITE ELEMENT 33
MODELING OF WING FUSELAGE
ATTACHMENT BRACKET
4.1 CAD MODEL OF WING FUSELAGE 33
ATTACHMENT BRACKET
4.2 FINITE ELEMENT MODEL 36
4.2.1 FE Model of Assembly 36
4.2.2 Quality Criteria for Elements 39
5 LINEAR STATIC STRESS ANALYSIS OF 41
THE WING FUSELAGE ATTACHMENT
BRACKET
5.1 APPLICATION OF LOADS AND 41
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
5.2 CALCULATION OF LIFT LOAD 43
5.3 RESULTS FROM FINITE 46
ELEMENT ANALYSIS
5.3.1 Stress Contour of the Wing Fuselage 46
Attachment Bracket
5.3.2 Displacement Contour of the Wing 47
Fuselage attachment Bracket
6 DAMAGE TOLERANCE ANALYSIS 48
6.1 MVCCI METHOD FOR CALCULATION 48
OF STRESS INTENSITY FACTOR
6.2 CRACK PROPAGATION ANALYSIS 49
6.2.1 Approach 49
6.2.2 FE Model of the Lug Plate 50
6.2.3 Lug Plate with Loads and Boundary 50
Conditions

vi
 6.2.4 Stress Contour of Lug Plate with the 54
Crack
6.3 PROCESS OF CRACK INITIATION 55
AND PROPAGATION
6.4 STRESS INTENSITY FACTOR 58
CALCULATION
7 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 59
7.1 STATIC RESULT ANALYSIS 59
7.2 CRACK PROPOGATION RESULT 60
ANALYSIS
7.3 COMPARISION OF RESULTS 61
8 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE OF 63
WORK
8.1 CONCLUSION 63
8.2 FUTURE SCOPE OF WORK 64

REFERENCES 65

vii
 LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE NO

Table.1.3.1 Material properties of metals at room 8

temperature for aircraft structure
Table 1.3.2.1 Mechanical properties of fibers 11
Table 1.3.2.2 Longitudinal mechanical properties of fiber 12
composite
Table.7.1.1 Static Stress Analysis observation for the 59
attachment bracket
Table 7.2.1 Strain energy release rate and SIF results 60
of various iterations

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE NO.

Figure.1.2.1.1 Airplane parts and its function 3

Figure.1.2.1.2 Typical Airframe Structure 3
Figure.1.2.1.3 Fuselage 4
Figure.1.2.1.4 Wing and its components 5
Figure.1.2.1.5 Empennage 6
Figure.1.2.1.6 Landing gear 6
Figure.1.5 Wing Fuselage Attachment Bracket 15
Figure.1.6.3 Different stages of Finite Element Analysis 20
Figure.3.2 Detailed flow chart 29
Figure.3.3.1 Alloy Steel, AISI-4340 properties 31
Figure.3.3.2 Aluminum Alloy–2024-T351properties 32
Figure.4.1.1 Isometric view of wing fuselage attachment bracket 33
Figure.4.1.2 Front View of wing fuselage attachment bracket 34
Figure.4.1.3 Top View of wing fuselage attachment bracket 34
Figure.4.1.4 Side View of wing fuselage attachment bracket 35
Figure.4.2.1.1 Two dimensional FE model of the wing fuselage 36
Attachment bracket
Figure.4.2.1.2 Three Dimensional Views of Wing Fuselage Lug 37
Attachment Bracket to be analyzed
Figure.4.2.1.3 Modeling of Rivets as RBE2 38
Figure.4.2.1.4 FE Model -I SPAR 38
Figure.4.2.1.5 FE Model – Lug with Flanges 39
Figure.4.2.2 Quality criteria for elements 40
Figure.5.1.1 Loads and boundary conditions 42
Figure.5.1.2 Macroscopic view of the applied load and fixations 42
Figure.5.1.3 Zoomed view of Fixation nodes 43

ix
Figure.5.3.1.1 Stress Contour shows Maximum Tensile Stress 46
Figure.5.3.1.2 Representation of Maximum Stress Concentration 47
Area and Identification of Maximum Tensile Stress
Figure.5.3.2 Deformed shape of wing fuselage attachment bracket 47
Figure.6.2.2 Lug plate considered for crack propagation analysis 50
Figure.6.2.3.1 Lug plate with loads and boundary conditions 51
Figure.6.2.3.2 Close up view of applied nodal load 52
Figure.6.2.3.3 Lug plate edge with fixation 53
Figure.6.2.4 View of stress contour for lug plate at crack tip 54
Figure.6.3.1 Crack closed from ref [1] 55
Figure.6.3.2 Crack extended ref [1] 55
Figure.6.3.3 Modified crack closure method ref [1] 56
Figure.6.3.4 Initially modeled, non-deformed finite element mesh 56
ref [1]
Figure.6.3.5. Deformed finite element mesh ref [1] 57
Figure.6.3.6 Node wise crack opening for four-noded element 57
ref [1]
Figure.7.3.1 Plot-G versus Crack length 62
Figure.7.3.2 Plot-SIF versus Crack length 62

x
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION

The design and service experience of the transport aircraft for the recent 50
years has shown that to ensure the aircraft reliability and efficiency it is required
to provide in their structures the solution of three concepts simultaneously, i.e.
safe life, fail-safe and damage tolerance. The comprehensive data about these
structural features have been collected by now in the course of testing coupons,
panels and full-scale structures. This presentation generalizes the information in
order to estimate tolerable stresses, fatigue performances, fail safety, damage
tolerance of wide-body aircraft fabricated of modern materials.

1.2 INTRODUCTION TO AIRCRAFT STRUCTURE

Aircraft are vehicles which are able to fly by being supported by the air, or in
general, the atmosphere of a planet. An aircraft counters the force of gravity by
using either static lift or by using the dynamic lift of an airfoil, or in a few cases
the downward thrust from jet engines. Aircrafts are generally built-up from the
basic components of wings, fuselage, tail units and control surfaces. Each
component has one or more specific functions and must be designed to ensure
that it can carry out these functions safely. Any small failure of any of these
components may lead to a catastrophic disaster causing huge destruction of lives
and property. When designing an aircraft, it’s all about ending the optimal
proportion of the weight of the vehicle and payload. It needs to be strong and
stiff enough to withstand the exceptional circumstances in which it has to

1
operate. Durability is an important factor. Also, if a part fails, it doesn’t
necessarily result in failure of the whole aircraft. It is still possible for the aircraft
to glide over to a safe landing place only if the aerodynamic shape is retained-
structural integrity is achieved.

The basic functions of an aircraft’s structure are to transmit and resist the
applied loads; to provide an aerodynamic shape and to protect passengers,
payload systems, etc., from the environmental conditions encountered in flight.
These requirements, in most aircraft, result in thin shell structures where the
outer surface or skin of the shell is usually supported by longitudinal stiffening
members and transverse frames to enable it to resist bending, compressive and
torsional loads without buckling. Such structures are known as semi-monocoque,
while thin shells which rely entirely on their skins for their capacity to resist
loads are referred to as monocoque.

The load-bearing members of these main sections, those subjected to major

forces, are called the airframe. The airframe is what remains if all equipment and
systems are stripped away. In most modern aircrafts, the skin plays an important
role in carrying loads. Sheet metals can usually only support tension. But if the
sheet is folded, it suddenly does have the ability to carry compressive loads.
Stiffeners are used for that. A section of skin, combined with Stiffeners, called
stringers, is termed a thin-walled structure.

The airframe of an aircraft is its mechanical structure, which is typically

considered to exclude the propulsion system. Airframe design is a field of
engineering that combines aerodynamics, materials technology and
manufacturing methods to achieve balances of performance, reliability and cost.

2
1.2.1 Major aircraft components

Figure.1.2.1.1.Airplane parts and its function

Figure.1.2.1.2 Typical Airframe Structure

Fuselage:

The main body structure is the fuselage to which all other components are
attached. The fuselage contains the cockpit or flight deck, passenger
compartment and cargo compartment. While wings produce most of the lift, the
fuselage also produces a little lift. A bulky fuselage can also produce a lot of
3
drag. For this reason, a fuselage is streamlined to decrease the drag. We usually
think of a streamlined car as being sleek and compact - it does not present a
bulky obstacle to the oncoming wind. A streamlined fuselage has the same
attributes. It has a sharp or rounded nose with sleek, tapered body so that the air
can flow smoothly around it.

Figure.1.2.1.3.Fuselage

Wings:

The wings are airfoils attached to each side of the fuselage and are the
main lifting surfaces that support the airplane in flight. Wings vary in design
depending upon the aircraft type and its purpose. Most airplanes are designed so
that the outer tips of the wings are higher than where the wings are attached to
the fuselage. This upward angle is called the dihedral and helps keep the airplane
from rolling unexpectedly during flight. Wings also carry the fuel for the
airplane.The wing is a framework made up of spars, ribs, skin and (possibly)
stringers. This is the main lifting surface.

4
 Figure.1.2.1.4Wing and its components

The Empennage:

The empennage is most commonly referred to as the tail of the aircraft. It

consists of two primary structures, the vertical stabilizer and the horizontal
stabilizer. Both of these stabilizers help the aircraft maintain a straight path
through the air as it flies..

 Vertical Stabilizer - This stabilizer is as its name suggest. It is the vertical "fin"
you see on an aircraft. The vertical stabilizer is home to another control surface
of the aircraft: the rudder. The rudder looks just like the vertical stabilizer but is
hinged on the trailing edge of the stabilizer and can deflect to the left or right.
This control surface yaws the aircraft.

 Horizontal Stabilizer - The horizontal stabilizer is home to the control surface

known as the elevator. The elevator is attached to the horizontal stabilizer in
much the same way the rudder is to the vertical stabilizer. The elevators pitch the
aircraft. More specifically, they point the nose of the aircraft either up or down in
the desired direction.

5
 Figure.1.2.1.5 Empennage

Landing gear:

The landing gear is the principle support of the airplane when parked,
taxiing, taking off, or when landing. The most common type of landing gear
consists of wheels, but airplanes can also be equipped with floats for water
operations, or skis for landing on snow.

Figure.1.2.1.6 Landing gear

6
Control surfaces:

As aircraft move in three dimensions we need various control devices to

control it. Fixed-wing aircrafts have control surfaces for each one of these
dimensions. Usually these are placed in the extremes of the aircraft (tail and
wings) to get the maximum strength and response using small moving parts
thanks to the lever concept.

Following are the various Control Surfaces

 The Flaps on the wings control the drag and lift on the structure
 The Rudder is used to change pitch (side-to-side) movement.
 The Elevator is used to change pitch (up-down) movement.
 The Aileron is uses to change lift, drag and roll.
 The Slats are used to change lift.

1.3 AIRCRAFT MATERIALS

1.3.1 Metallic Materials

The most common metals used in aircraft construction are aluminum,

magnesium, titanium, steel, and their alloys. Traditional metallic materials used
in aircraft structures are Aluminum, Titanium and steel alloys. In the past three
decades applications of advanced fibre composites have rapidly gained
momentum. To date, some modern military jet fighters already contain
composite materials up to 50% of their structural weight. Selection of aircraft
materials depends on any considerations, which can in general be categorized as
cost and structural performance. Cost includes initial material cost,
manufacturing cost and maintenance cost. The key material properties that are
pertinent to maintenance cost and structural performance are

7
  Density (weight)
 Stiffness (young’s modulus)
 Strength (ultimate and yield strengths)
 Durability (fatigue)
 Damage tolerance (fracture toughness and crack growth)
 Corrosion
Seldom is a single material able to deliver all desired properties in all
components of the aircraft structure. A combination of various materials is often
necessary. Table 1.1 lists the basic mechanical properties of some metallic
aircraft structural materials.

Table.1.3.1 Material properties of metals at room temperature for aircraft structure

Properties
Material E γ σt σy ρ
GPa(msi) MPa(ksi) MPa(ksi) g/cm3
Aluminum
2024-T3 72(10.5) 0.33 449(65) 324(47) 2.78(0.10)
7075-T6 71(10.3) 0.33 538(78) 490(71) 2.78(0.10)
Titanium
Ti-6Al-4V 110(16) 0.31 925(138) 869(126) 4.46(0.16)

Steel
AISI4340 200(29) 0.32 1790(260) 1483(212) 7.8(0.28)
300M 200(29) 0.32 1860(270) 1520(220) 7.8(0.28)
σt = Tensile ultimate strength
σy = Tensile Yield strength

Alloys
An alloy is composed of two or more metals. The metal present in the
alloy in the largest amount is called the base metal. All other metals added to the
base metal are called alloying elements. Adding the alloying elements may result
in a change in the properties of the base metal. For example, pure aluminum is

8
relatively soft and weak. However, adding small amounts or copper, manganese,
and magnesium will increase aluminum's strength many times. Heat treatment
can increase or decrease an alloy's strength and hardness. Alloys are important to
the aircraft industry. They provide materials with properties that pure metals do
not possess.

Aluminum alloy:
Aluminum alloys are widely used in modern aircraft construction.
Aluminum alloys are valuable because they have a high strength-to-weight ratio.
Aluminum alloys are corrosion resistant and comparatively easy to fabricate. The
outstanding characteristic of aluminum is its lightweight.
Among the aluminum alloys, the 2024 and 7075 alloys are perhaps the most
used. The 2024 alloys (2024-T3, T42) have excellent fracture toughness and slow
crack growth rate as well as good fatigue life. The code number following T for
each aluminum alloy indicates the heat treatment process. The 7075 alloys
(7075-T6, T6510) have higher strength than the 2024 but lower fracture
toughness. The 2024-T3 is used in the fuselage and lower wing skins, which are
prone to fatigue due to applications of cyclic tensile stresses.

Titanium alloy:
Titanium is a lightweight, strong, corrosion resistant metal. Recent
developments make titanium ideal for applications where aluminum alloys are
too weak and stainless steel is too heavy.
Titanium alloy such as Ti-6Al-4V (the number indicates the weight
percentage of the alloying element) with a density of 4.5 g/cm3 is lighter than
steel (7.8 g/cm3) but heavier than aluminum (2.7 g/cm3). It’s ultimate and yield
stresses are almost double those of aluminum 7075-T6. Its corrosion resistance in
general is superior to both steel and aluminum alloys. While aluminum is usually

9
not for applications above 350o F, titanium, on the other hand, can be used
continuously up to 1000 o F.
Steel Alloys:

Among the three metallic materials, steel alloys have highest densities,
and are used only where high strength, high yield stress are critical. Examples
include landing gear units and highly loaded fittings. The high strength steel
alloy 300 m is commonly used for landing gear components. Besides being
heavy, steel alloys are generally poor in corrosion resistance. Components made
of these alloys must be plated for corrosion. These steels contain small
percentages of carbon, nickel, chromium, vanadium, and molybdenum. High-
tensile steels will stand stress of 50 to 150 tons per square inch without failing.
Such steels are made into tubes, rods, and wires.

1.3.2 Non Metallic Materials

In addition to metals, various types of plastic materials are found in

aircraft construction. Some of these plastics include transparent plastic,
reinforced plastic, composite, and carbon-fiber materials.
Transparent Plastic:
Transparent plastic is used in canopies, windshields, and other transparent
enclosures. You need to handle transparent plastic surfaces carefully because
they are relatively soft and scratch easily. At approximately 225°F, transparent
plastic becomes soft and pliable.

Reinforced Plastic:
Reinforced plastic is used in the construction of radomes, wingtips,
stabilizer tips, antenna covers, and flight controls. Reinforced plastic has a high
strength-to-weight ratio and is resistant to mildew and rot. Because it is easy to
fabricate, it is equally suitable for other parts of the aircraft. Reinforced plastic is

10
a sandwich-type material. It is made up of two outer facings and a center layer.
The facings are made up of several layers of glass cloth, bonded together with a
liquid resin. The core material (center layer) consists of a honeycomb structure
made of glass cloth. Reinforced plastic is fabricated into a variety of cell sizes.

Fiber-reinforced composites:
Materials made in to fiber forms can achieve significantly better
mechanical properties than their bulk counterparts. A notable example is glass
fiber v/s bulk glass. The tensile strength of glass fiber can be 2 orders of
magnitude higher than that of bulk glass. . Listed in table 1.2 are the mechanical
properties of some high performance manmade fibers.

Table 1.3.2.1 Mechanical Properties of Fibers

Properties
Material E σt ρ
GPa(msi) MPa(ksi) in g/cm3

E-glass 77 (11) 2.5 (350) 2.54

S-glass 85 (12) 3.5 (500) 2.48

Silicon carbide (nicalon) 190 (27) 2.8 (400) 2.55

Carbon (Hercules AS4) 240 (51) 3.6 (510) 1.80

Carbon (Hercules HMS) 360 (35) 2.2 (310) 1.80

Carbon (Toray T300) 240 (35) 3.5 ()500 1.80

Boron 385 (55) 3.5 (500) 2.65

Kevlar-49(Aramid) 130 (18) 2.8 (400) 1.45

Kevlar-29 65(9.5) 2.8 (400) 1.45

Fibers alone are not suitable for structural applications. To utilize the
superior properties of fibres, they are embedded in a matrix material that holds

11
the fibres together to form a solid body capable of carrying complex loads.
Matrix materials that are currently used for forming composites include 3 major
categories: polymers, metals, and ceramics. The resulting composites are usually
referred to as polymer matrix composites (PMC), metal matrix composites
(MMC), and ceramic matrix composites (CMC).

Table 1.3.2.2 Longitudinal mechanical properties of fiber composite

Material Type Properties

E in σt in MPa(ksi) ρ in g/cm3
GPa(msi)

Carbon-Epoxy T300/5208 1 40 (20) 1.5 (210) 1.55

IM6/3501-6 17 7 (25.7) 2.86 (414) 1.55
1 40 (20)
AS4/3501-6 2.1 (300) 1.55

Boran-Aluminum B/A12024 2 10 (30) 1.5 (210) 2.65

Glass-Epoxy S2 Glass-Epoxy 43 (6.2) 1.7 (245) 1.8

Aramid Epoxy Kev 49-Epoxy 7 0 (10) 1.4 (200) 1.4

Fiber composites are stiff, strong, and light and are thus most suitable for
aircraft structures. They are often used in the form of laminates that consists of a
number of unidirectional lamina with different fiber orientations to provide
multidirectional load capability. Composite laminates have excellent fatigues
life, damage tolerance, and corrosion resistance. Laminate constructions offer the
possibility of tailoring fiber orientations to achieve optimal structural
performance of the composite structure.

1.4 DAMAGE TOLERANCE

In today’s structural design, fatigue and damage tolerance analysis have

become most important and challenging task for the designers because of failure

12
of structure due to different type of damages. Some of these damages have
caused a loss of entire structure i.e. whole aircraft itself.

Damage tolerance is a property of a structure relating to its ability to

sustain defects safely until repair can be affected. The approach to engineering
design to account for damage tolerance is based on the assumption that flaws can
exist in any structure and such flaws propagate with usage. This approach is
commonly used in aerospace engineering to manage the extension of cracks in
structure through the application of the principles of fracture mechanics. In
aerospace engineering, structure is considered to be damage tolerant if a
maintenance program has been implemented that will result in the detection and
repair of accidental damage, corrosion and fatigue cracking before such damage
reduces the residual strength of the structure below an acceptable limit.

Two major approaches were developed in the past, namely, the safe-life
and the fail-safe design concepts. The safe-life approach correlating the time to
failure of the specimen with the applied loads characteristics to predict the time
to failure of real components using Minor’s rule approach. The other is fail-safe
concept, in which linear elastic fracture mechanics approach (LEFM) are used to
predict the crack stability, crack growth and hence the minimal time between the
two inspections to avoid a crack reaching critical size. The later concept called
the damage tolerance, whose function is to assess the effect of cracks in the
structure. The analysis of damage tolerance behavior plays an important role in
the structural integrity program.

Damage tolerant design methods were developed that assume the structure
contains initial cracks. The initial crack usually based on the inspection limits.
There are two general approaches, with variations, that may be followed to
guarantee that the structure does not fail in service, they are;

13
Slow Crack Growth:
The slow crack growth design criteria select component material and sets
stress levels so that the assumed pre-existent crack will not grow to failure during
service and are the normal approach for single load path structure. For increased
safety, the allowed service life usually obtained by dividing the total crack
growth period by a factor of 2. The component would have to be inspected at this
time before continued operation would be permitted.

Fail-Safe Design:
This design concept assumes the possibility of multiple load paths and/or
crack arrest features in the structure so that a single component failure does not
lead to immediate loss of the entire structure. The load carried by the broken
member is immediately picked up by adjacent structure and total fracture is
avoided. It is essential;

1.5 INTRODUCTION TO WING FUSELAGE ATTACHMENT

The wing fuselage attachment is a type of lug attachment which is a

connector type element widely used as structural supports for pin connections in
airframe structure. For example, the other lug attachment application include
engines to pylon support attachment fittings, landing gear links etc

Failure of lug joints may lead to the catastrophic failure of the whole
structure. Lugs are mainly used where the bending loads needs to be avoided. So
in the attachment process of wings to the fuselage the attachment brackets are
used. This attachment bracket consists of lugs and spars. Attachment lugs can
become the most fracture critical components in aircraft structure, and the
consequences of structural lug failure can be very severe that sometimes the wing
and fuselage get separated and result in accidents. Therefore, it is important to

14
establish design criteria and analysis methods to ensure the damage tolerance of
aircraft lug attachment.

Lugs are the primary structural elements in airframe structure that are
widely used in connecting different components of the airframe. For ex. aircraft
engine-pylon support fittings, wing fuselage attachment, and landing gear links
are some of the typical applications where attachment lugs of various
configurations can be found. Failure of lug may lead to the catastrophic failure of
the whole structure. Finite element analysis studies and experimental data help
the designer to safeguard the structure from catastrophic failure. Attachment lugs
can be some of the most fracture critical components in aircraft structure, and the
consequences of structural lug failure can be very severe (disastrous). It is so
severe (disastrous) that quite a few times the fuselage and wings of an aircraft get
separated. Therefore, it is important to establish design criteria and analysis
methods to ensure the damage tolerance of aircraft attachment lugs.

Figure.1.5 Wing Fuselage Attachment Bracket

15
1.6 FUNDAMENTALS OF FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

1.6.1 Introduction to FEA approach

The finite element method (FEM) is a numerical technique for solving

problems which are described by partial differential equations or can be
formulated as functional minimization. A domain of interest is represented as an
assembly of finite elements. Approximating functions in finite elements are
determined in terms of nodal values of a physical field which is sought. A
continuous physical problem is transformed into a discredited finite element
problem with unknown nodal values. For a linear problem, a system of linear
algebraic equations should be solved. Values inside finite elements can be
recovered using nodal values.

Two features of the FEM are worth to be mentioned:

1) Piece-wise approximation of physical fields on finite elements provides good
precision even with simple approximating functions (increasing the number of
elements we can achieve any precision).
2) Locality of approximation leads to sparse equation systems for a discredited
problem. This helps to solve problems with very large number of nodal
unknowns.

1.6.2 How the FEM works

To summarize in general terms how the finite element method works we

list main steps of the finite element solution procedure below.
1. Discretize the continuum- The first step is to divide a solution region into
finite elements. The finite element mesh is typically generated by a preprocessor
program, which is MSC Patran in our case. The description of mesh consists of
several arrays, main of which are nodal coordinates and element connectivity.

16
2. Select interpolation functions- Interpolation functions are used to interpolate
the field variables over the element. Often, polynomials are selected as
interpolation functions. The degree of the polynomial depends on the number of
nodes assigned to the element.
3. Find the element properties- The matrix equation for the finite element
should be established which relates the nodal values of the unknown function to
other parameters. For this task different approaches can be used; the most
convenient are: the variational approach and the Galerkin method.
4. Assemble the element equations- To find the global equation system for the
whole solution region; we must assemble all the element equations. In other
words we must combine local element equations for all elements used for
discretization. Before solution, boundary conditions (which are not accounted in
element equations) should be imposed.
5. Solve the global equation system- The finite element global equation system
is typically sparse and symmetric. Direct and iterative methods can be used for
solution. The nodal values of the sought function are produced as a result of the
solution.
6. Compute additional results- In many cases; we need to calculate additional
parameters. For example, in mechanical problems strains and stresses are of
interest in addition to displacements, which are obtained after solution of the
global equation system. So, these values of displacements can be used to find
other parameters.

In fact, Finite element modeling (FEM) is a powerful computer tool for

determining stresses and deflections in a given structure which is too complex for
classical analysis. Material properties such as Young’s modulus (E) and
Poisson’s ratio (µ) are entered along with boundary conditions such as
displacements (u), applied loads (P), etc.

17
The FEM method has these characteristics:

 Solving arrays of large matrix equations

 Fundamentally simple concepts involving basic stiffness and deflection
equations
 The first step is the construction of a structural model that breaks a
structure into simple shapes or elements located in space by a common
coordinate grid system
 The coordinate points, or nodes, are locations in the model where output
data are provided
 Essentially, FEM geometrically divides a structure into small elements
with easily defined stress and deflection characteristics

The method appears complex because a model of an airframe structure

can have thousands of elements or members, each with its own set of equation.
Because of the very large number of equations and corresponding data involved,
the finite-element method is only possible when performed by computer. With
FEM, modeling is critical because it establishes the structural locations where
stresses are evaluated, thus:

 If a component is modeled inadequately, the resulting computer analysis

could be quite misleading in its predictions in areas of maximum stress,
deflection etc.
 Modeling inadequacies include the incorrect placement of elements and
attempting to define a structure with an insufficient number of elements
 Such errors can be avoided by anticipating areas of maximum strain, but
doing so requires engineering experience

18
  In most cases, the finer the grid, the more accurate the results.
 However, the computer capacity, time required and cost of analysis
increases with the numbers of elements used in the model.
 The efficiency can be increased by concentrating elements in the
interested areas of high stress while minimizing the number of elements in
low stress areas

It is not uncommon to develop FEM for prototype design for which

experimental data can be obtained. Strain gauging is probably the most common
method of obtaining experimental data in structural tests. Once FEM results and
experimental data have been correlated, design modifications can be made, and
these subsequent changes are often tested through FEM before being
implemented on the actual prototype.

FEM is useful in design work, such as structural repair or modification,

where a structural beef-up or change is contemplated. A FEM baseline model can
be made for an existing structure for which stress and deflection data are known.

A comparison is made between FEM results and known experimental data

to calibrate the FEM results. Proposed design modifications can then be
evaluated to the baseline modeling knowing that the new FEM results will have
the same accuracy and requires the same calibration as the baseline case.

19
1.6.3 The different stages of FEA

In practice, a finite element analysis usually consists of three principal

steps: Preprocessing, Analysis and Post processing. The same is used for the
current study analysis of a wing fuselage attachment bracket. The stages involved
in FEM are shown in the figure below,

(Pre-processing)

(Analysis)

(Post-processing)

Figure.1.6.3.Different stages of Finite Element Analysis

20
1.7 LINEAR STATIC STRESS ANALYSIS

Linear static stress analysis is the most common type of FEA. Even if you
initially plan on doing a dynamic or nonlinear analysis you will normally start
with a linear static stress analysis. If the device, or the FEA model of the device,
can't survive a linear static stress analysis its problems have to be fixed before
moving on to more complex, time consuming, and expensive dynamic or
nonlinear analyses. Sometimes the linear analysis results will indicate the need to
do a nonlinear analysis.

21
 CHAPTER-2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Aircraft structure is the most obvious example where functional

requirements demand light weight and, therefore, high operating stresses. An
efficient structural component must have three primary attributes; namely, the
ability to perform its intended function, adequate service life, and the capability
of being produced at reasonable cost. Attention is now focused on propagation of
crack. The review summarizes the previous efforts on the ‘Damage tolerance
assessment of wing attachment structures.

Thomas Swift (1994) addresses some of these issues outlined as follows.

The importance of the two-bay crack design criterion needs restating. The
threshold for detailed inspection of fatigue critical elements needs close
examination, especially for elements that do not have crack-arrest capability.
The effects of multisite damage on residual strength and discrete source damage
capability need to be addressed, especially for aircraft operating beyond half their
test life.

E.F. Rybicki and M.F. Kanninen presented an efficient technique for

evaluating stress intensity factors. The method, based on the crack closure
integral, can be used with a constant strain finite element stress analysis and a
coarse grid. The technique also permits evaluation of both Mode I and Mode II
stress intensity factors from the results of a single analysis. Example
computations are performed for a double cantilever beam test specimen, a finite
width strip with a central crack, and a pin loaded circular hole with radial cracks.

22
Close agreement between numerical results given by this approach and reference
solutions were found in all cases.

Andrzej Leski studied the implementation of virtual crack closure

technique in engineering FE calculation. Equations for three-dimensional brick
elements are given. Algorithms of applying the VCCT are presented and
precisely explained. General conditions and limitations for using the VCCT with
commercial software are provided. An example of implementing the VCCT in
the MSC Patran follows. The presented example consists of two PATRAN-
dedicated procedures. In this way a useful tool for fracture mechanics
calculations has been created. He concluded that the virtual crack closure
technique is a convenient tool for stress intensity factor investigation. The main
advantage of the VCCT is that it does not require a special mesh arrangement
around the crack front. The major limitation of the VCCT is that it can only be
applied to linear elastic fracture mechanics problems. The VCCT can be easily
implemented in any commercial FE software.

Jaap Schijve proposed new concepts related to structural design, material

selection, production techniques, inspection procedures and load spectra.
Extensive research efforts have been spent. Our understanding of fatigue damage
problems increased significantly. Simultaneously our tools to tackle problems
have been developed to a high potential efficiency. And still, there are problems.
The present paper is a personal impression of evaluating experience, design
aspects, predictions and experiments associated with damage tolerance of aircraft
structures.

Venkatesha.B.K, Suresh B.S and Girish K.E studied on Analytical

Evaluation of Fatigue Crack Arrest Capability in Fuselage stiffened panel of
Large Transport Aircraft in 2012. This study deals with crack propagation occurs

23
when there is a central longitudinal crack presents in the application of transverse
applied load. This crack propagation occurs due to high stress concentration near
rivet hole and critical stress intensity factor is identified through many iterations
by MVCCI method. Finally fixation of tear strap would arrest the crack
propagation. They have arrived that if the crack length increases then the stress
intensity factors also gets increased.

Federal Aviation Administration technical center proposed “ Damage

tolerance handbook Vol-1 and Vol-2, which explain fracture mechanics, fatigue
crack propagation and damage tolerance evaluation and requirement. It also deals
with all the structural failure of liberty ship in 1943 to the Dan-Aircraft
horizontal stabilizer failure in Zambia in 1976, which was the main reason to
change the older design approach to current damage tolerance approach.

B.K.Sriranga, Dr.C.N.Chandrappa, R.Kumar and Dr.P.K.Dash

carried out Stress analysis of Wing–Fuselage Lug Attachment Bracket of a
Transport Aircraft with the consideration of Wing spar and Lug joint as
attachment bracket. They dealt with the Linear Static stress Analysis of the
bracket for the aircraft lift loading. Finally they have arrived that maximum
tensile stress is identified at one of the lug holes by the finite element approach.
They also said that validation of FEM approach is done by considering a plate
with a circular hole. From this it is clear that FEM approach is validated.
The authors of the above papers concluded that fatigue crack normally
initiates from the location maximum tensile stress in the structure. Further fatigue
life estimation can be carried out to predict the life of the component. The
conclusion from the above static stress analysis is high stress concentration
would be the cause for the further crack initiation, propagation and finally
fracture of the component. Further to extend the analysis towards the fatigue
many researches has been done.

24
 Tulio N.Bittencourt, Ahmabous Barry, and Anthony R. Ingratta have
done an analysis to give a conclusion about the best numerical SIF approach.
They took three mostly used numerical methods which are Displacement
Correlation Technique, J-Integral Formulation and Modified Crack Closure
Integral. It dealt with finding out the best method for the crack propagation study
and further researches were extended towards the various methods of cracks
propagation. They concluded that crack propagation study by stress intensity
factor approach would be most appropriate numerical method. Further question
arrives which numerical method would be the best one to carry the SIF (Stress
Intensity Factor) approach.
Through their experiments on various specimens, they have concluded
that Modified Crack Closure Integral Method is more accurate with the reference
results and convergence than the other two methods for all the three modes of
fracture. But the Displacement Correlation Technique is valid only for mode I
not for the other modes.

Friedrich G. Buchholz, J. Wiebesiek, M. Fulland and Hans A. Richard

studied on 3D fatigue Crack Growth using computational fracture analysis. They
found that MVCCI results are very well with the global behavior of the reference
solutions for the fracture analysis of 2D and 3D crack problems are presented.

Naveen Kumar H S, Prof. B S Suresh and Girish K E has done a study

on net section failure between the two equal cracks in an infinite plate using
MVCCI method and concluded that in case of multi site damage (MSD) is
presented in the fuselage structure the high stress concentration will be near the
rivet holes and the same will cause the crack. This study has relevance in the
structural integrity evaluation of aging transport aircraft due to multisite damage.

25
 K.Dwarakanath, B Dattaguru, and PK Dash, and S Viswnath from
National Aerospace Laboratory conducted a study on Stress intensity factors for
cracks emanating from a pin-loaded lug by. Their study dealt with the Stress
intensity factors (S.I.F.s) for a single radial through crack and for two diametrical
through cracks originating from a pin-loaded lug. The stress intensity factor was
obtained using modified virtual crack closure integral (MVCCI) technique to
post process the FEA data. Nodal forces and displacements in the elements
surrounding the crack tip were used to estimate strain energy release rate from
which S.I.F. is estimated.

From the above literatures, Modified Virtual Crack Closure Integral

Method is found as the most appreciable method to analyze the crack growth in a
Wing Fuselage Attachment Bracket through FEA approach.

26
 CHAPTER-3

FORMULATION OF PROBLEM

3.1 PROBLEM DEFINITION

Aircraft lug joint bracket is one of the most fracture critical components in
aircraft wing-fuselage structure, and the consequences of structural lug failure
can be very severe that the fuselage and wings of an aircraft get separated.
Therefore, it is important to establish design criteria and analysis methods to
ensure the damage tolerance of aircraft attachment lugs.

3.1.1 Objective of the Present Work

The current study involves damage tolerance evaluation of the wing

fuselage attachment bracket and then the study of crack propagation to find the
life of the wing fuselage attachment bracket.
When it comes to modeling the attachment bracket, FE representation of
the bracket is rather straightforward since their mechanical properties and
geometries are known. On the other side modeling of the crack on the lug bracket
are complex and unknown, and thus, have been the subject of numerous research
efforts. Some of the earlier experimental work on wing fuselage attachment
bracket was done by some papers. They have concluded that during the life cycle
of the bracket the lug may undergo cracks and thus catastrophic failure may
occur. All the above things are detailed in the literature study section.
The main focus of this study was to implement Modified Virtual Crack
Closure Integral (MVCCI) method on the wing fuselage attachment bracket. The
wing fuselage attachment bracket was modeled with known geometries and the

27
static analysis was done to find out the high stress concentration. And then the
MVCCI method is used for the crack propagation study to find the critical stress
intensity factor. The background theory of the MVCCI method also will be
discussed later in this progress of this thesis.

3.2 METHODOLOGY

Any aircraft must continue its fly with the minimal crack before it leads to
catastrophic failure, for the same in the current study the following analysis
method is carried out.

 Bracket modeling is done using CATIA V5 with the known geometry

details taken from reference paper B.K.Sriranga for the civil transport
aircraft.
 The bracket is later meshed with the 3 noded tria elements and 4 noded
quadrilateral elements using HYPERMESH. Mesh size is arrived after
much iteration is between 3.5 mm.
 Calculation of lift loads and boundary conditions.
 Pre and Post processing is done by MSC.PATRAN V2012. The mesh
quality, normal and free edges check is carried out by PATRAN.
 MSC.NASTRAN V2005.5.0 is used to solve the FE model.
 Static analysis study of the bracket to find the high stress concentration.
 Stress Intensity Factor calculation will be done numerically by MVCCI
method. It leads the calculation of life of the attachment bracket.

28
 The flow chart shown in the below figure will give the diagrammatic
representation of the work flow.

Figure 3.2 Detailed flow chart

29
3.3 MATERIAL SELECTION AND SPECIFICATION

Selection of aircraft materials depends on any considerations, which can

in general be categorized as cost and structural performance. Cost includes initial
material cost, manufacturing cost and maintenance cost. The key material
properties that are pertinent to maintenance cost and structural performance are

 Density (weight)
 Stiffness (young’s modulus)
 Strength (ultimate and yield strengths)
 Durability (fatigue)
 Damage tolerance (fracture toughness and crack growth)
 Corrosion

Seldom is a single material able to deliver all desired properties in all

components of the aircraft structure. A combination of various materials is often
necessary.

Alloy Steel, Heat Treated AISI-4340

The material considered for the lug part of the structure is steel alloy
AISI4340. The following are the properties.

1. Young’s Modulus, E = 210000N/mm2

2. Poison's Ratio, μ = 0.3
3. Ultimate Strength, σu = 745N/mm2
4. Density, 𝜌 = 7.85g/cm3
5. Fracture toughness, K IC = 89 MPa√𝑚

30
Aluminium Alloy – 2024-T351

The material considered for the I-spar and rivets of the structure is
aluminum alloy-2024T351. The following are the properties.

1. Young’s Modulus, E = 73100N/mm2

2. Poison's Ratio, μ = 0.3
3. Ultimate Strength, σu = 469N/mm2
4. Density 𝜌= 2.78g/ cm3

More details about the materials are shown in the below tables

Figure 3.3.1 Alloy Steel, AISI-4340 properties

31
Figure 3.3.2 Aluminum Alloy–2024-T351properties

32
 CHAPTER 4

GEOMETRICAL AND FINITE ELEMENT MODELING OF WING

FUSELAGE ATTACHMENT BRACKET

4.1 CAD MODEL OF WING FUSELAGE ATTACHMENT BRACKET

The wing fuselage attachment bracket considered in this study is shown in

Figure 3.2 to 3.5 which is designed in CATIA V5. The attachment bracket
consists of a lug and a portion of the spar connected to each other by rivets. The
lug consists of two pin holes along with an integrated top flange and bottom
flange which will be connected to the spar. The geometric dimensions of the lug
attachment bracket are shown in the figures below. Three views of the wing
fuselage lug attachment bracket are shown in the figure 3.3 to 3.5. A three
dimensional view of the lug attachment bracket is shown in figure 3.2

Figure 4.1.1.Isometric view of wing fuselage attachment bracket

33
Figure 4.1.2.Front View of wing fuselage attachment bracket

Figure.4.1.3.Top View of wing fuselage attachment bracket

34
Figure4.1.4.Side View of wing fuselage attachment bracket

35
4.2 FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

Analyses are performed in this study by using a finite element model of

the wing fuselage attachment bracket. The model was developed in
HYPERMESH 11.0 it has 24937 elements, 25552 nodes and 56 MPC’s. A
typical finite element mesh for complete assembly is shown in figures 3.6 and
3.7, for the different components are shown in figures 3.8 to 3.10. The global z
coordinate is directed along the web of the spar, while the global x coordinate is
directed along the flange and the global y direction is perpendicular to both.

4.2.1 FE Model of Assembly

FE model of the wing fuselage Lug attachment bracket is as shown in

Figure below Meshing is carried out by using CQUAD4 and CTRIA3 shell
elements. Triangular elements are used for the transition between the coarser
mesh to finer mesh.

Figure.4.2.1.1 Two dimensional FE model of the wing fuselage attachment

bracket

36
 Figure.4.2.1.2.Three Dimensional FE modal of Wing Fuselage attachment
Bracket

FE Model of Different Structural Members in Wing Fuselage Lug Attachment

Bracket

 Lug
 I-spar
 Top and bottom flanges of the lug attachment bracket
 Rivets

The corresponding mesh generated for each of the above mentioned members are
shown in the figures below. To distribute the loads equally on all the rivets, they
are modeled as RBE2, which is shown in the below figure.

37
Figure.4.2.1.3.Modeling of Rivets as RBE2

Figure.4.2.1.4.FE Model -I SPAR

38
 Figure.4.2.1.5.FE Model – Lug with Flanges

4.2.2 Quality Criteria for Elements

Once after meshing and before proceeding further, we check for elements
so that no elements fail during the application of the load. The elements which
failed under the specific condition was checked and modified so that all the
elements fell under the pre-defined standards and hence we ended up with a mesh
where none of the elements failed.
The elements were checked for the following criteria:

39
 Figure.4.2.2 Quality criteria for elements

Aspect ratio: It is the ratio of the largest to its adjacent side. Aspect ratio should
be less than 5 and much less in region of higher stress distribution. Element with
unit aspect ratio yields the best result.
Skew: Skew in trias is calculated by finding the minimum angle between the
vector from each node to the opposing mid-side and the vector between the two
adjacent mid sides at each node of the element. Ninety degrees minus the
minimum angle found is reported as the skew.
Warp: The amount by which an element or element face (In case of solid
elements) deviates from being planar.
Mesh was checked for any duplicate nodes and elements. Mesh optimization was
effectively implemented to check the convergence of the results by iteratively
increasing the mesh density

40
 CHAPTER 5

LINEAR STATIC STRESS ANALYSIS OF THE WING FUSELAGE

ATTACHMENT BRACKET

Once after the FE model prepared in the HYPERMESH, the preprocessing

like quality normal, orthogonal, free edge and equivalence check of the FE model
along with loads and boundary conditions will be carried out in the
MSC.PATRAN. Then the linear static analysis solution 101 is done in the
MSC.NASTRAN solver and the post processing will be done in the
MSC.PATRAN.

5.1 APPLICATION OF LOADS AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

The application of loads and boundary conditions along with the finite
element model are shown in the below figure. A load of 26470.67 N is equally
introduced to all nodes at one end of the spar beam. This load will essentially
create the required bending moment at the root. And the loads are applied in the z
direction as shown in the figure since it is a lift load. The top and bottom lug
holes of the wing fuselage Lug attachment bracket are constrained with all six
degrees of freedom (i.e123456; three translational and three rotational) at the
semicircular circumferential region. So that it will act as a cantilever beam.

41
 Figure5.1.1 Loads and boundary conditions

Figure5.1.2.Macroscopic view of the applied load and fixations

42
 Figure5.1.3.Zoomed view of Fixation nodes

5.2 CALCULATION OF LIFT LOAD

Most of the wing bending is carried by the spars in the wing structure. The
maximum bending moment occurs at the root of the spar where wing and
fuselage components will be attached to each other. The load calculation for the
wing fuselage lug attachment bracket is described in the next section. The load
calculation on the wing fuselage attachment bracket is shown in this section.

Calculation of Limit and Ultimate load:

Aircraft category considered for the current thesis is medium size civil
transport aircraft. So the design limit and ultimate load calculation for the wing
fuselage attachment bracket are as follows,

43
Total weight of the aircraft = 6500 kg
= 63765 N

Load factor considered in design = 3g

Design limit load on the structure = 3 x W

= 3 x 63765
= 1.9129 x E^5 N

Design ultimate load = 1.5 x Design Limit Load

=1.5 x 1.9129 x E^5
= 2.8694 x E^5 N

Calculation of total lift load acting on bracket:

Distribution of lift load on fuselage and wings are 20% and 80% respectively.

Lift Load acting on the Wings = 2.8694 x E^5 x 0.8

= 229.554 x E^3 N

Load acting on the each Wing is = 229.554 x E^3 / 2

= 114.777 x E^3 N

44
Number of spars in the current wing = 3
There are three spars available in the considered aircraft wing, so the load
sharing by each spar is calculated are as follows
a. Spar 1=15%
b. Spar 2=40%
c. Spar 3=45%

The wing fuselage attachment bracket considered for the current analysis is at
spar1.
Therefore, load acting on the spar 1 = 0.15 x Load acting on the wing
= 0.15 x 114.777 x E^3
= 17.216 x E^3 N

Total bending momentum acting at the root of the beam

= 17.216 x E^3 x 750
= 12.912 x E^6 N/mm

To simulate the equivalent bending moment at the distance of 487.785 mm from

the free end of the beam considered in the analysis is
= 12.912 x E^6 / 487.785
= 26.47067 x E^3 N

So finally the lift load of 26470.67 N is applied on the wing fuselage attachment
bracket.

45
5.3 RESULTS FROM FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

The following results are observed in the post processing of the bracket
assembly.
A maximum stress of 552 N/mm2 is observed at the Lug section of the
bracket as shown in figure 3.14 and the maximum displacement of 1.93 mm at
the free end of the cantilever structure can be observed from the displacement
contour as shown in the figure 3.16. The stress values at the lug hole and the
displacement contours are shown in the figures below. The maximum stress
value obtained from the analysis is used as the input for the fatigue calculations.

5.3.1 Stress Contour of the Wing Fuselage Attachment Bracket

Figure5.3.1.1.Stress Contour shows Maximum Tensile Stress

46
 Figure5.3.1.2.Representation of Maximum Stress Concentration Area and
Identification of Maximum Tensile Stress

5.3.2 Displacement Contour of the Wing Fuselage attachment Bracket

Figure.5.3.2 Deformed shape of wing fuselage attachment bracket.

47
 CHAPTER-6

DAMAGE TOLERANCE ANALYSIS

6.1 MVCCI METHOD FOR CALCULATION OF STRESS INTENSITY

FACTOR

Modified Virtual Crack Closure Integral (MVCCI) method is used to

determine stress intensity factor for different crack lengths in the stiffened panel.
MVCCI method is based on the energy balance. In this technique, SIF is obtained
for fracture mode from the equation.
k i2
Gi   (i  1,2,3)
E

Where ‘Gi’ is the strain energy release rate for mode i, ‘ki’ is the stress
intensity factor for mode i, ‘E’ is the modulus of elasticity and ‘β’ is 1 for plane
stress condition. Calculation of the energy release rate is based on Irwin
assumption that the energy released in the process of crack expansion is equal to
work required to close the crack to its original state as the crack extends by a
small amount ‘Δa’. Irwin computed this work as
a
1
W   u (r ). (r  a)dr ,
20

Where ‘u’ is the relative displacement, ‘r’ is the distance from the crack
tip and ‘Δa’ is the change in virtual crack length. Therefore, the strain energy
release rate is
a
W 1
a0 2a 
Gi  lim  lim u (r ). (r  a)dr ,
a0 a
0

48
After simplification, modified strain energy release rate is
F  u
G N/mm
2  a  t

Where ‘F’ is the nodal forces at the crack tip, ‘u’ is Crack Opening
displacement (COD),‘t’ is thickness of the skin and ‘a’ is the elemental edge
length near the crack tip. The stress intensity factor value at the crack tip can be
calculated as follows:
(i) Force at the crack tip is calculated by means of adding two elemental forces
above the crack tip, and
(ii) Crack opening displacement is calculated by means of subtracting the two
elemental displacement values at the crack tip.

6.2 CRACK PROPAGATION ANALYSIS

6.2.1 Approach

Assuming an initial crack of 1.463 mm in the simplified lug plate where

the high stress concentration found in the bracket, the crack propagation study
has been carried out to find out the crack growth rate through stress intensity
factor approach.

49
6.2.2 FE Model of the Lug Plate

The FE model of the simplified lug plate considered for the crack
propagation study is shown in the below figure,

Figure6.2.2.Lug plate considered for crack propagation analysis

6.2.3 Lug Plate with Loads and Boundary Conditions

The locally calculated nodal load of 1640 N is applied for all the 34 nodes
of the semicircle portion of the lug in the longitudinal direction, such a way that
to propagate the crack in the transverse direction of the initially assumed crack of
1.463 mm and the edge of the plate is constrained in all the six degrees of
freedom.

50
The loads and boundary conditions are shown as in the below figures.

Figure6.2.3.1 Lug plate with loads and boundary conditions

51
Figure6.2.3.2.Close up view of applied nodal load

52
Figure6.2.3.3.Lug plate edge with fixation

53
6.2.4 Stress Contour of Lug Plate with the Crack

The lug plate with loads after preprocessing taken to NASTRAN run and
the post processing stress contour is shown in the below figure.

Figure6.2.4 View of stress contour for lug plate at crack tip

54
6.3 PROCESS OF CRACK INITIATION AND PROPAGATION

Figure6.3.1.Crack closed from ref [1]

Figure6.3.2.Crack extended ref [1]

55
 Figure6.3.3.Modified crack closure method ref [1]

Figure6.3.4.Initially modeled, undeformed finite element mesh ref [1]

56
 Figure6.3.5.Deformed finite element mesh ref [1]

Figure6.3.6.Node wise crack opening for four-noded element ref [1]

57
6.4 STRESS INTENSITY FACTOR CALCULATION

Stress intensity factor is calculated from the formulas mentioned in the

beginning of this chapter, which are
k i2
Gi   (i  1,2,3)
E
F  u
Gi  N/mm
2  a  t

From FE software (MSC NASTRAN)

For crack length of 100 mm (2a=2.926 mm, a=1.463 mm)
Crack opening displacement (COD), Δu = 0.1 mm
Forces at the crack tip opening displacement, F = 4216 N
Elemental edge length at the crack tip, a= 1.463 mm
Thickness of the lug plate, t = 20 mm
Then, Strain energy release rate, G = 7.204 N/mm
Therefore, Stress intensity factor for mode I loading,
kI = 38.89626 Mpa√m

Several iterations are done in the same manner to study the crack
propagation by varying the crack length which is tabulated and discussed in the
next chapter

58
 CHAPTER 7

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

7.1 STATIC RESULT ANALYSIS

Table.7.1.1 Static Stress Analysis observation for the attachment bracket

 Stress analysis of the wing fuselage lug attachment bracket is carried out
and maximum tensile stress is identified at one of the lug plate.
 FEM approach is followed for the stress analysis of the wing fuselage lug
attachment bracket.
 Maximum tensile stress of 552 N/mm2 and maximum deformation of 1.93
mm is observed in the bracket.
 Several iterations are carried out to obtain a mesh independent value for
the maximum stress.
 A fatigue crack normally initiates from the location maximum tensile
stress in the structure.

59
7.2 CRACK PROPOGATION RESULT ANALYSIS

The table shows the strain energy release rate and stress intensity factor
values arrived at each iteration. These iterations are carried out by varying the
crack length as shown in the below table.

Table 7.2.1 Strain energy release rate and SIF results of various iterations

The initial crack length of 1.46 mm is considered near the lug hole, where
the high stress concentration is observed. For the applied loads and boundary
conditions at the crack tip the elemental forces and the crack tip opening
displacement are extracted.

60
Then the strain energy release rate (G) is calculated for the considered crack by
using the below expression,
F  u
Gi  N/mm
2  a  t

For the same crack the stress intensity factor (K) is calculated with the help of
below expression
k i2
Gi   (i  1,2,3)
E

In the second iteration the crack length is increased and G and k values are
calculated.
For all the iteration, the elemental force at crack tip and crack tip opening
displacement values are also calculated. In the same way for the various cracks
the strain energy release rate and stress intensity factors calculated and the results
are tabulated as shown in the table 7.2.1

7.3 COMPARISION OF RESULTS

The results are compared in the graphical representation by drawing plots

of stress intensity factor and strain energy release rate versus crack length. The
plot between the strain energy release rate and crack length is done as shown in
the figure 7.3.1. The plot between the stress intensity factor and crack length is
done as shown in the figure 7.3.2

61
 Figure.7.3.1.Plot-G versus Crack length

Due to the applied load the crack length is getting increased. When the
crack length is increasing then the strain energy release rate is also gets
increased.

Figure.7.3.2.Plot-SIF versus Crack length

When the crack length is increasing then the stress intensity factor also
gets increased.

62
 CHAPTER 8

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE OF WORK

8.1 CONCLUSION

 The crack propagation analysis of the attachment lug is done through

various iterations considering an initial crack length of 1.46 mm near the
lug hole, where the high stress concentration is observed
 The fracture toughness of the given lug plate material of is 89 MPa m^1/2.
Once the material reaches the mentioned fracture toughness then the
material degradation begins.
 The analysis in this thesis for the lug plate starts with an initial crack
length of 1.46 mm. This 1.46 mm initial crack starts propagates further
once we apply the loads and boundary conditions.
 Once the crack length reaches 20 mm then the strain energy release rate is
increasing drastically. So then the crack propagates very rapidly.
 As the crack length reaches the critical value, the stress intensity factor
also increases very rapidly. When the crack length reaches the value of
19.5 mm, the stress intensity factor observed is as 91.07 MPa m^1/2. This
is called critical stress intensity factor.
 Critical stress intensity factor is directly proportional to the fracture
toughness. So once the material reaches the value of critical stress
intensity factor then the material leads to fracture.

63
  At the iteration 13 when the crack length becomes near to 20 mm, the
stress intensity factor is recorded more than the material fracture
toughness value.
 On further analysis for the crack length to a value more than 20 mm to
know the behavior of the lug plate ,the stress intensity factor value has
become much more than the fracture toughness
 It clearly shows that, once the stress intensity factor reaches more than the
material fracture toughness after iteration 13then the crack propagation
will be more severe
 So for this crack propagation study of the lug attachment bracket due to
lift load, the lug plate considered for the analysis is safe for the crack
length up to 20 mm, beyond which it leads to fracture. This in turn results
the detachment of the aircraft wings from the fuselage which leads to a
catastrophic failure causing major loss for the aircraft as well as for the
passengers.

8.2 FUTURE SCOPE OF WORK

The future scope lies in the implementation of crack arrest technique so as

to stop the crack propagation and then to increase the life of the attachment
bracket. The similar methodology can be used to find out the critical stress
intensity and the life of the various aircraft components.

64
 REFERENCES

1. Andrzej Leski, (2006), ‘Implementation of the virtual crack closure technique

in engineering FE calculations’. Finite element analysis and design 43, 2003,
261-268.
2. B.K.Sriranga, Dr.C.N.Chandrappa, R.Kumar and Dr.P.K.Dash, (2012) ‘Stress
Analysis of Wing-Fuselage Lug Attachment Bracket of a Transport Aircraft’,
ICCOMIM-2012.
3. E.F. Rybicki and M.F. Kanninen, (1997) ‘A finite element calculation of stress
intensity factor by a modified crack closure integral.’ Engineering fracture
mechanics, vol. 9, pg. 931-938.
4. Federal Aviation Administration technical center ‘Damage tolerance
handbook’(1993) Vol. 1 and 2
5. Friedrich-G. Buchholz, Azzedine Chergui, Hans A. Richard, (1999)
‘Computational Fracture Analysis by Means of Virtual Crack Closure Integral
Methods’, MECOM.
6. Harish E.R.M, Mahesha.K, and Sartaj Patel (2013), “Stress Analysis for Wing
Attachment Bracket of a Six Seater Transport Airframe Structure”, IJIRSET,
Volume.2, Issue 7, July 2013.
7. Jaap Schijve, (2009) ‘Fatigue damage in aircraft structures, not wanted, but
tolerated?’ international journal of fatigue, Volume 31, Issue 6, June, Pages
998-1011.
8. Naveen Kumar H S, Prof. B S Suresh and Girish K E, ( 2012) ‘A Net Section
Failure Between Two Equal Cracks in an Infinite Plate’ IJMER, Volume 2,
Issue 4, July-August 2012, pp-2655-2661.
9. T. Swift, (1994) ‘Damage tolerance capability’, international journal of
fatigue, Volume 16, Issue 1, January, Pages 75-94

65