×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Mechanically Fasyened Joint Analysis

Mechanically Fasyened Joint Analysis

Mechanically Fasyened Joint Analysis

(OP)
Hello,

I amm analyzing a multi-shear plane joint consisting of four aluminum sheets fastened tpgether using solid aluminum rivets.

For the static analysis I assumed bearing yield would result in all rivets being loaded equally.

For fatigue I created spring models (one using the NACA method and the other using Huth).  Out of curiousity I loaded the model to ultimate to see if in fact the end rivets were bearing out - thus allowing for load redistribution.

What I discovered is that all the bearing margins are relatively high (MS > +0.50), but the shear margins are negative (MS < -0.20) for the end fasteners.

Knife edge won't allow for larger fasteners, and program mgmt will not allow higher strength rivets (due to manufaturing difficulties)

Thus, my dilema.  I believe that ignoring the negative shear margins from the spring models is unconservative.

What are your thoughts on this?

Thank you

RE: Mechanically Fasyened Joint Analysis

(OP)
Dang.  I should flag my own post as inappropriate - all those typos are embarrassing.  Can we edit our own posts?

RE: Mechanically Fasyened Joint Analysis

You can flag it as innapropriate and ask them to edit.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Mechanically Fasyened Joint Analysis

Depending upon your loading scenario will give a different load distribution within your fasteners.
Take an aircraft emergency landing scenarion (9g fwd), it is assumed that all the fasteners will take an equal share of the load due to strain compatability of the joints, this is the basis of the simple bolt group analysis (Sum of R^2). If the loading is not taken to match this criteria, such as limit loading then the strain matching of individual bolt joints will not occur, and you will develop higher elastic stresses within the material adjacent to each bolt. This is the way FE distributes the loading in a linear static model.
One ongoing probelm with derived fastener spring stiffnesses is that amongst other factors, they are a function of type and material of fastener, hole condition, fit and preload and geometry and material of the plates. The best way to get your constants is to test.
if as you say, your getting a decent margin on bearing, but low margins on shear means that its a crap design. We should never really design a joint to be shear critical, unless it has a very specific reason for being this way (fuse pins being one example).
Play tunes with fastener sizes and pitches if possible, or reduce the end fastener sizes to increase there flexibility, or look back at the loading deivation to see whether there is any over-conservative assumptions in there.

RE: Mechanically Fasyened Joint Analysis

personally i wouldn't use a fastener stiffness model for static strength calcs.  i'd assume load redistribution withini the joint so that each rivet would be allowed to carry either it's maximum shear allowable or the local bearing allowable, whichever is smaller.  the complexity in your joint is how the 4 sheets distribute the load in a rational manner ... you could you fastener stiffness models to start this, then allow some fasteners to yield (presumably the outer ones, near an edge), redistributing load to the less loaded fasteners (presumably the inner ones, away from any edge).

RE: Mechanically Fasyened Joint Analysis


If they're down in shear they'll yield in shear rather than yielding in bearing. In metal it's notmal to assume reasonable at ultimate redistribution with maybe 10% on top.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources