Abstract
Fatigue considerations play a major role in the design of optimised flight vehicles, and the ability to accurately design against the possibility of fatigue failure is paramount. However, recent studies have shown that, in the Paris Region, cracking in high-strength aerospace quality steels and Mil Annealed Ti–6AL–4 V titanium is essentially R ratio independent. As a result, the crack closure and Willenborg algorithm’s available within commercial crack growth codes are inappropriate for predicting/assessing cracking under operational loading in these materials. To help overcome this shortcoming, this chapter presents an alternative engineering approach that can be used to predict the growth of small near-micron-size defects under representative operational load spectra and reveal how it is linked to a prior law developed by the Boeing Commercial Aircraft Company. A simple method for estimating the S–N response of 7050-T7451 aluminium is then presented.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
M. Skorupa, “Load Interaction Effects During Fatigue Crack Growth Under Variable Amplitude Loading—A Literature Review. Part II: Qualitative Interpretation,” Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct., Vol. 22, 1999, pp. 905–926.
B. Dixon, L. Molent, and S.A. Barter, “The FINAL program of enhanced teardown for agile aircraft structures,” Proceedings of 8th NASA/FAA/DOD Conference on Aging Aircraft, Palm Springs, 31 Jan–3 Feb, 2005.
L. Molent, R. Singh, and J. Woolsey, “A method for evaluation of in-service fatigue cracks,” Eng. Fail. Anal., Vol. 12, 2005, pp. 13–24.
R. Jones, L. Molent, and S. Pitt, “Crack growth from small flaws,” Int. J. Fatigue, Vol. 29, 2007, pp. 658–1667.
S.C. Forth, M.A. James, W.M. Johnston, and J.C. Newman, Jr., “Anomolous Fatigue Crack Growth Phenomena in High-strength Steel,” Proceedings Int. Congress on Fracture, Italy, 2007.
M.N. James and J.F. Knott, “An Assessment of Crack Closure and the Extent of the Short Crack Regime in QlN (HY80) Steel,” Fatigue Frac. Eng. Mater. Struc., Vol. 8, No. 2, 1985, pp. 177–191.
R. Jones, B. Farahmand, and C. Rodopoulos, “Fatigue crack growth discrepencies with stress ratio,” Theor. Appl. Frac. Mech., doi: 10.1016/tafmec.2009.01.004.
R. Jones, S. Pitt, and D. Peng, “The Generalised Frost–Dugdale Approach to Modeling Fatigue Crack Growth,” Eng Fail Anal, 15, 2008, pp. 1130–1149.
R. Jones, B. Chen, and S. Pitt, “Similitude: Cracking in Steels,” Theor. Appl. Frac. Mech., Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 161–168.
D.L. Davidson, “How Fatigue Cracks Grow, Interact with Microstructure, and Lose Similitude,” Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics: 27th Volume, ASTM STP 1296, R.S. Piascik, J.C. Newman, and N.E. Dowling, Eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, 1997, pp. 287–300.
R. Jones, L. Molent, and K. Krishnapillai, “An Equivalent Block Method for Computing Fatigue Crack Growth,” Int. J. Fatigue, Vol. 30, 2008, pp. 1529–1542.
P. White, S.A. Barter, and L. Molent, “Observations of Crack Path Changes Under Simple Variable Amplitude Loading in AA7050-T7451,” Int. J. Fatigue, Vol. 30, 2008, pp. 1267–1278.
J. Schijve, “Fatigue Crack Growth Under Variable-Amplitude Loading,” Eng. Frac. Mech., Vol. 11, 1979, pp. 207–221.
J.P. Gallagher and H.D. Stalnaker, “Developing Normalised Crack Growth Curves for Tracking Damage in Aircraft, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,” J. Aircraft, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 114–120.
P.C. Miedlar, A.P. Berens, A. Gunderson, and J.P. Gallagher, “Analysis and Support Initiative for Structural Technology (ASIST),” AFRL-VA-WP-TR-2003-3002, 2003.
J.M. Barsom and S.T. Rolfe, “Fracture and Fatigue Control in Structures: Applications of Fracture Mechanics,” Butterworth-Heinemann Press, 1999.
M. Miller, V.K. Luthra, and U.G. Goranson, “Fatigue Crack Growth Characterization of Jet Transport Structures,” Proc. of 14th Symposium of the International Conference on Aeronautical Fatigue (ICAF), Ottawa, Canada, 1987.
R. Jones, and S. Pitt, “Crack Patching: Revisited,” Comp. Struct., Vol. 32, 2006, pp. 218–223.
B.J. Murtagh and K.F. Walker, “Comparison of Analytical Crack Growth Modelling and the A-4 Wing Test Experimental Results for a Fatigue Crack in an F-111 Wing Pivot Fitting Fuel Flow Hole Number 58”, DSTO-TN-0108, 1997.
R. Jones and S.C. Forth, “Cracking In D6ac Steel,” Submitted J. Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech., 2008 (in press).
E.K. Walker, “The Effect of Stress Ratio During Crack Propagation and Fatigue for 2024-T3 and 7076-T6 Aluminium.” In: Effect of Environment and Complex Load History on Fatigue Life, ASTM STP 462, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1970, pp. 1–14.
R. Jones, C. Wallbrink, S. Pitt, and L. Molent, “A Multi-Scale Approach to Crack Growth,” Proceedings Mesomechanics 2006: Multiscale Behavior of Materials and Structures: Analytical, Numerical and Experimental Simulation, Porto, Portugal, 2006.
C.M. Hudson, “Fatigue-Crack Propagation in Several Titanium and One Superalloy Stainless-Steel Alloys, NASA TN D-2331, 1964.
T.R. Porter, “Method of Analysis and Prediction for Variable Amplitude Fatigue Crack Growth,” Eng. Fract. Mech., Vol. 4, 1972, pp. 717–736.
W. Zhuang, S. Barter, L. Molent, “Flight-By-Flight Fatigue Crack Growth Life Assessment,” Int J Fatigue, Vol. 29, 2007, pp. 1647–165.
P.D. Bell and M. Creager, “Crack Growth Analysis For Arbitrary Spectrum Loading,” Volume I – Results and Discussion, Final Report: June 1972 – October 1974, Technical Report AFFDL-TR-74-129, 1974.
R. Jones, S. Pitt, and D. Peng, “An Equivalent Block Approach to Crack Growth,” In: Multiscale Fatigue Crack Initiation and Propagation of Engineering Materials: Structural Integrity and Microstructural Worthiness, G.C. Sih, Ed., ISBN 978-1-4020-8519, Springer Press, 2008.
L. Molent, S. Barter, and R. Jones, “Some Practical Implications of Exponential Crack Growth,” In: Multiscale Fatigue Crack Initiation and Propagation of Engineering Materials: Structural Integrity and Microstructural Worthiness, G.C. Sih, Ed., ISBN 978-1-4020-8519, Springer Press, 2008.
H.W. Liu, Crack Propagation in Thin Metal Sheet Under Repeated Loading, Wright Air Development Center, WADC TN, 1959, pp. 59–383.
U.H. Tiong and R. Jones, “Damage Tolerance Analysis of a Helicopter Component,” Int. J. Fatigue, 2008 doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2008.05.012
J.C. Newman, Jr., FASTRAN-II- A fatigue Crack Growth Structural Analysis Program, NASA Technical Memorandum 104159, 1992.
L. Molent, Q. Sun and A.J. Green, “Characterisation of equivalent initial flaw sizes in 7050 aluminium alloy,” Fatigue Fract. Engng. Mater Struct., Vol. 29, 2006, pp. 916–937.
Acknowledgments
This work was performed under the auspices of the DSTO Centre of Expertise in Structural Mechanics which is supported by the RAAF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Air Structural Integrity Section. We specifically acknowledge the support given by Lorrie Molent, Functional Head Combat Aircraft (Structural Integrity), Dr Weiping Hu, Science Team Leader: Structural Lifing Methods and Tools, Dr. Scott Forth at the NASA Johnson Space Center, Prof. Chris Rodopoulos at the University of Patras, Greece, and the Materials and Engineering Research Centre, Sheffield Hallam University, England, and Dr. Bob Farahmand at TASS (Los Angeles).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Appendix: Formulae for Computing the Crack Opening Stress
Appendix: Formulae for Computing the Crack Opening Stress
Newman [31] defined an opening load, which he denoted as S0, as:
and
for \(S_{\max}< 0.8\sigma_{0},S_{\min}>-\sigma_{0}\), where Smax and Smin are the maximum minimum stress in the cycle and σ 0 is the yield stress. If \(S_{0}/S_{\max}\) is less than R then \(S_0 = {\textrm{S}}_{\min}\), whilst if \(S_0/S_{\max}\) is negative then \(S_0/S_{\max} = 0.0\).
The A coefficients in Equations (2.14) and (2.15) are functions of α, the constraint factor, and \(S_{\max}/\sigma_0\) and are given in [31] as:
for α = 1 to 3.
The boundary correction factor, F, accounts for the influence of finite width on the stresses required to propagate the crack. For 3D small 3D surface cracks we can approximate F as F ∼ 2 × 1.12/π.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jones, R., Peng, D. (2009). Tools for Assessing the Damage Tolerance of Primary Structural Components. In: Farahmand, B. (eds) Virtual Testing and Predictive Modeling. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-95924-5_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-95924-5_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-95923-8
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-95924-5
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)