Differences Between the Fatigue Behaviour of Longitudinal Lap Joints in a Pressurized Fuselage and Laboratory Lap Joint Specimens

  • Andrzej Skorupa
  • Małgorzata Skorupa
Part of the Solid Mechanics and Its Applications book series (SMIA, volume 189)


As already said earlier, a primary loading for the fuselage skin is hoop tension. However, the total effect of pressurization is a combination of hoop and longitudinal tension and local out-of-plane bending of the skin, the so-called pillowing. Besides the circumferential pillowing between the stiffeners shown in Fig. 2.1a, pressurization also causes a longitudinal pillowing of the skin and stringers between the frames, Fig. 2.1b. Because the stringers hardly restrain the skin pillowing, this effect will be strongly dependent on the type of the stringer-frame connection, for example the shear-tied frame or “floating” frame, cf. Figs. 1.2 and 1.3. Due to the pillowing, the hoop stress is not uniformly distributed between the frames. The loading complexity is additionally increased by the tear straps. A comparison between the measured and predicted (from FE analysis) membrane hoop stresses in a panel typical for the Boeing narrow-body fuselage airplane is shown in Fig. 2.2. The structure consists of “floating” frames and riveted tear straps. The data are for the location along an axial line adjacent to the lap joint. The stresses are normalized by the nominal hoop stress in an equivalent unstiffened cylinder of the same radius R and lap joint skin thickness t. The maximum stress equal to 80% of the nominal stress occurs midway between the tear straps, while the stresses in the vicinity of the tear straps are much lower.


Fatigue Life Hoop Stress Squeeze Force Rivet Hole Hoop Tension 
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.


  1. Fawaz, S.A.: Fatigue crack growth in riveted joints. Ph.D. thesis, TU Delft, Delft (1997)Google Scholar
  2. Furuta, S., Terada, H., Sashikuma, H.: Fatigue strength of fuselage joint structures under ambient and corrosive environment. In: Cook, R., Poole, P. (eds.) Proceedings of 19th ICAF Symposium, Fatigue in New and Ageing Aircraft, Edinburgh, Scotland, 18–20 June 1997, pp. 231–249. EMAS, Warley (1997)Google Scholar
  3. Hartman, A.: Fatigue tests on single lap joints in clad 2024-T3 aluminium alloy manufactured by a combination of riveting and adhesive bonding. Report NLR M.2170. NLR, Amsterdam (1966)Google Scholar
  4. Hertel, H.: Ermüdungsfestigkeit der Konstruktionen. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York (1969)Google Scholar
  5. Klaassen, W.: The fatigue diagram for fluctuating tension of single lap joints of clad 24 ST and 75 ST aluminum alloy with 2 rows of 17 S rivets. Report NLR M.1980. NLR, Amsterdam (1955)Google Scholar
  6. Mayville, R.A., Warren, T.J.: A laboratory study of fracture in the presence of lap splice multiple site damage. In: Atluri, S.N., Atluri, S.N., Sampath, S.G., Tong, P. (eds.) Structural Integrity of Aging Airplanes, pp. 263–273. Springer, Berlin (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Miller, M., Gruber, M.L., Wilkins, K.E, Worden, R.E.: Full-scale testing and analysis of fuselage structure. In: Harris, Ch.E. (ed) Proceedings of FAA/NASA International Symposium on Advanced Structural Integrity Methods for Airframe Durability and Damage Tolerance, Hampton, VA, 4–6 May 1994. NASA CP 3274, pp. 481–496 (1994)Google Scholar
  8. Molent, L., Jones, R.: Crack growth and repair of multi-site damage of fuselage lap joints. Eng. Fract. Mech. 44, 627–637 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Müller, R.P.G.: 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. Ph.D. thesis, TU Delft, Delft (1995)Google Scholar
  10. Schijve, J.: Fatigue of Structures and Materials, 2nd edn. Springer, Dordrecht/Heidelberg/London/New York (2009a) (with CD-Rom)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Schijve, J.: Fatigue damage in aircraft structures, not wanted, but tolerated? Int. J. Fatigue 31, 998–1011 (2009b)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Schmidt, H.-J., Brandbecker, B.: The effect of environmental conditions and load frequency on the crack initiation life and crack growth in aluminium structure. In: Bigelow, C.A. (ed.) Proceedings of FAA/NASA Symposium on Continued Airworthiness of Aircraft Structures, Atlanta, GA, 28–30 Aug 1996, DOT/FAA/AR-97/1, pp. 171–182 (1997)Google Scholar
  13. Schütz, W.: Zeitfestigkeit einschnittiger Leichtmetall-Nietverbindungen. Bericht Nr. F-47. Laboratorium für Betriebsfestigkeit, Darmstadt (1963)Google Scholar
  14. Terada, H.: Structural fatigue and joint degradation. Int. J. Fatigue 23, 21–30 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Vlieger, H.: Results of uniaxial and biaxial tests on riveted fuselage lap joint specimens. In: Harris, Ch.E (1994) Proceedings of FAA/NASA International Symposium of Advanced Structural Integrity Methods for Airframe Durability and Damage Tolerance, Hampton, VA, 4–6 May 1994. NASA CP 3274, pp. 911–930 (1994)Google Scholar
  16. Vlieger, H., Ottens, H.H.: Uniaxial and biaxial tests on riveted fuselage lap joint specimens. Report NLR CR 97319 L. NLR, Amsterdam (1998)Google Scholar
  17. Wanhill, R.J.H., Koolloos, M.F.J.: Fatigue and corrosion in aircraft pressure cabin lap splices. Int. J. Fatigue 23(Suppl. 1), 337–347 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrzej Skorupa
    • 1
  • Małgorzata Skorupa
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and RoboticsAGH University of Science and TechnologyKrakówPoland

Personalised recommendations