Advertisement

Analysis of Multiple Site Damage with Implications for Nondestructive Evaluation

  • Kimberley Buhler
  • Alten F. GrandtJr.
Chapter

Abstract

Multiple-Site Damage (MSD) in aging aircraft has motivated analysis of the fatigue life of a panel containing a row of cracked holes [1–3]. Given the initial MSD configuration and loading conditions, individual cracks are grown incrementally until link-up or the panel failes. First, stress intensity factors are calculated for all cracks. One crack tip is then assumed to advance a small amount, and the cycles for this increment of growth are calculated. The remaining cracks are then grown a distance corresponding to this cyclic interval by employing a fatigue crack growth model to relate the cyclic stress intensity factor and fatigue crack growth rate. After each incremental growth the current crack geometry is compared to one of several failure criteria [3] to determine whether the panel fails. For holes which are initially uncracked, cumulative damage is summed at these locations in conjunction with a Neuber notch analysis. When this strain-life analysis determines that “crack initiation” has occurred at a given hole, crack growth calculations continue at that location, and the routine is repeated until the failure criterion is satisfied.

Keywords

Stress Intensity Factor Fatigue Life Fatigue Crack Growth Residual Strength Fatigue Crack Growth Rate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    E.J. Moukawsher, “Fatigue Life and Residual Strength of Panels With Multiple Site Damage”, M.S. Thesis, School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Purdue University, May 1993.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E.J. Moukawsher, A.F. Grandt, Jr., and M.A. Neussl, “A Fatigue Analysis of Panels With Multiple Site Damage, 1992 USAF Structural Integrity Program Conference, San Antonio, Texas, December 1–3, 1992.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E.J. Moukawsher, A.F. Grandt, Jr. and M.A. Neussl, “Analysis of Panels with Multiple Site Damage,” AIAA Paper No. 94-1459, AIAA SDM Conference, Hilton Head, SC, April 18–21, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    T. Swift, “Effect of MSD on Residual Strength”, from a presentation given at the U.S. Air Force Symposium on Multi-Site Damage, February 1992.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    K. Buhler, “A Study of Fatigue Crack Growth of Panels Containing Multiple Site Damage,” M.S. Thesis, School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Purdue University, December 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kimberley Buhler
    • 1
  • Alten F. GrandtJr.
    • 2
  1. 1.Warner Robins Air Logistics CenterRobins AFBUSA
  2. 2.School of Aeronautics and AstronauticsPurdue UniversityW. LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations