BOLTED JOINT OF COMPOSITE PLATES

BY USING FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

IKHWAN SHAFIQ BIN ZAINAL ABDIN

This dissertation was submitted in part fulfilment of requirements for the degree of MSc
Offshore Floating Systems

DEPT. OF NAVAL ARCHITECTURE, OCEAN AND MARINE ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE

AUGUST 2014

COURSEWORK/PROJECT COVERSHEET
This document is the coursework/project coversheet for all NAME classes conducted at University of
Strathclyde for academic year 2013-14. Please do the following when submitting your coursework:

Staple a completed printed copy of this form to every piece of coursework/project work you
submit for classes in the Department of Naval Architecture & Marine Engineering.
Avoid the use of document containers such as cardboard or plastic covers, document
wallets, ring binders or folders (unless otherwise instructed by the class lecturer).

We do not wish to discourage students from discussing their work with fellow students and
collaborating in solving problems. However you must ensure that your submitted work distinguishes
your own intellectual contribution. The key point is that you must not present the results of another
persons work as though they were your own.
SUBMISSION DETAILS
Please ensure that the details you give are accurate and completed to the best of your knowledge.
Registration Number :

Name :

Class Code :

Coursework Title:

Lecturer

Declaration
I have read and understood the University of Strathclyde guidelines on plagiarism.
http://www.strath.ac.uk/media/ps/cs/gmap/academicaffairs/policesandprocedures/student-guideto-academic-practice-and-plagiarism.pdf
I declare that:
1. This is my coursework/project assignment. This is the version that I am submitting for
assessment. I understand the penalties of plagiarism.
2. Wherever published, unpublished, printed, electronic or other information sources have
been used as a contribution or component of this work, these are explicitly, clearly and
individually acknowledged by appropriate use of quotation marks, citations, references and
statements in the text.

Signature: _____________________________________ Date of Submission: ________________

My Documents/Template Edited Sept. 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER

TITLE

PAGE

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
1.0

INTRODUCTION

2.0

AIMS OF THE PROJECT

3.0

CRITICAL REVIEW
3.1
Finite Element Analysis of Bolted Composite Joint
3.2
Bolt Modelling in Finite Element

6
6
10

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF BOLTED

COMPOSITE JOINT
4.1
Problem Statement
4.2
Finite Element Model
4.3
Analysis and Procedures
4.3.1 Preprocessor
4.3.2 Solution Processor
4.3.3 General Postprocessor

13
13
15
17
18
24
26

5.0

RESULT DISCUSSION

30

6.0

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

35

REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

37

4.0

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE

TITLE

PAGE

1.1

Classifications of composites based on reinforcements

3.1
3.2

Protruding bolt and countersunk bolt type

Finite element modelling and meshing as introduced by
Ireman (1998) and McCarthy (2005)
Finite element models for the structure with a bolted joint.
(a) Solid bolt model, (b) coupled bolt model, (c) spider bolt
model and (d) no-bolt model

3.3

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12

Geometric parameters of the bolted composite joint

Developed geometry of the bolted joint
Contact surfaces highlighted in red
Process flowchart for the analysis of bolted composite in
ANSYS
Layer stacking of each plies forming the composite plate
Individual meshing of each geometry forming the bolted
joint
Defined boundary conditions for the bolted joint
Deformation shape and gradients of Set A (a) & (c) and Set
B (b) & (d) after load applied
Stress contours in x-, y-, and z-components for Set A (top
row) and Set B (bottom row)
Stress intensity around the vicinity of the hole
Total mechanical strain intensity through the thickness of
the joint
Von Mises stress of the bolt

11
14
16
16

19
22
25
26
27
28
28
29

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE

TITLE

PAGE

1.1

Advantages and disadvantages of bolts in composite plates

4.1

Material properties of HTA/6376 graphite/epoxy lamina

used for the composite plate
Joint configuration and geometric description
Contact surfaces generated from the Contact Manager
wizard

4.2
4.3

5.1
5.2
5.3

Von Mises strain on surface of the composite plate and the

secondary bending value
Summary of selected stress and strain obtained from
ANSYS general postprocessor
Comparison of bolts Von Mises stress with material yield
stress

13
14
24

31
31
32

1.0

INTRODUCTION

A study on the behaviour of composite plates joined together by bolt in lap-joint

configuration using finite element analysis will be conducted in this project.

A three

dimensional finite element modelling will be developed using standard finite element
package ANSYS. Mainly there are two methods of joining composite plates in single lapjoint either mechanically (bolted, riveted) or bonding (adhesive). This report will focus on
the former.

Oxford University Press defined composite as constructional material made up of

recognizable constituents. Composite then can be described as a material consists of two or
more component of materials with different properties which was combined to form a new
unique property.

Composite has extensive range of applications especially in aircraft

structures due to its excellent mechanical properties combined with low density. Wood is one
example of early naturally-found composite materials with a unidirectional property of
cellulose fibres are embedded in a lignin matrix. From there, wood is used as thin plies
bonding together with different fibre orientations to form the laminates. These laminates are
then known as the ply-wood (Ireman, 1999).

Over the past few decades advanced composite materials have undergone rapid
development. Many of these developments came from the aircraft and defence industry in
search for reliable new material and more beneficial than steel. Composites can be classified
in various approach. One of it is by classifying the composites in term of reinforcement
form.

Reinforced composite comprises of particulate composite, flake composite, fibre

reinforced composite and laminated composite as illustrated in Figure 1.1 (Kalarikkal, 2004).
Laminated composite was chosen as the subject of analysis in this report. This kind of
composites consists of laminates which formed the bulk of the material. Laminates were
made by stacking together thin layers of materials oriented in different directions.

Figure 1.1. Classification of composites based on reinforcements. Source: Kalarikkal, 2004

One of the methods to combine two composite plates or laminate layers is by means
of mechanical fastener using bolt(s). This method is suitable to be implemented if the joint is
required to be disassembled and reassembled over time or when the surface preparation for
joint bonding is not possible. Usage of bolt(s) to joint two composite plates together becomes
a general preference because it offers low cost, simplicity and facilitation of disassembly for
repair. Therefore it is considered to be less costly than adhesive bonding joint when it comes
to tooling and inspection requirements. The choice of using bolt to join composite plates
together depends on several factors including need to disassembly, joint strength and
stiffness, and durability of the joint. Table 1 outlines the advantage and disadvantage of
mechanically fastened composite plates.

Table 1.1
Advantages and disadvantages of bolts in composite plates (Reference: Broughton, 2002)

Advantages

Disadvantages

Easy to disassemble

Considerable stress concentration

No thickness limitations

Added weight of mechanical fasteners

Simple joint configuration

Metallic components are prone to fatigue

Residual stress is generally not a problem

Hole formation can damage composite

Environmentally insensitive

Composite have poor bearing properties

Insensitive to peel forces

Fretting a problem in metals

2

This kind of joint is very popular in the aerospace industry for the aircraft and space
structures where composite is used for the body of the aircraft and panels are joined together
using mechanical fasteners. It is so because composite offers high specific modulus and high
specific strength required by the structures (Pakdil, 2009). In civil engineering applications,
fibre-reinforced composites are extremely useful as building material providing structural
integrity which is controlled by the strength of the connections either bolted, bonded or
combination of both (Rosner, 1992).

However with the case of bolted joint there is a concern regarding the hole for the bolt
joining the composite plates. The increased stress concentration factor around the hole is a
critical consideration during the design which contributes to the strength of the joint.
Improper design of the bolted joint may cause an overweight issue to design and risk of
defective to the structures. Application of composite material also has been introduced for oil
and gas industry especially in material selection for riser design. However, bolted composite
joints still limited to aerospace applications only.

In analysing the stress behaviour of the bolted-joint, the common methods fall into
two main categories: analytical, closed-form methods and finite element methods (Broughton,
2002).

Using analytical method generally quick and easy but only feasible to simple

geometries in which it cannot fully account for the complete stress and strain conditions
within the joint.

However, finite element method is very beneficial that almost any

geometrical shape can be analysed and even more accurate analysis of stress and strains
distributions as compared to analytical approach. Numerical analysis technique as in finite
element method offer solutions to complex problems that are too difficult or almost
impossible to be solved using analytical methods.

There are various finite element programs available but ANSYS is the one to be used
in this study. ANSYS is a general purpose finite element program for non-linear analysis
with pre- and post-processing capabilities.

This finite element tool provide in-built

constitutive models for simulating the behaviour of bolted-joint allowing for non-uniform
stress-strain distribution. Other useful features especially in analysing bolted composite joint
may include isotropic and orthotropic material properties, three-dimensional laminated shell
elements, maximum stress and strain, Tsai-Wu and user-defined stress criteria.

Stress

analysis in finite element often used to compare stress/strain distributions obtained from
different joint variables (e.g. laminate stacking, bolt diameter, edge-to-bolt distance).

The analysis of the bolted joint in three-dimensional is very important due to the
characteristics of the stress around the vicinity of the hole which act three-dimensionally.
Before the advancement in computer power and finite element software, most of the studies
for bolted joint in finite element are based on two-dimensional stress analyses (Ireman,
1998). This constraint is due to limited system capability of the computer and requirement of
large amount of modelling work. The problems can now be overcome today with standard
package of central processing unit (CPU) and graphical processing unit (GPU) combined
together to perform a complex three-dimensional modelling and finite element analysis.
Although finite element approach able to accommodate the geometries, loading, material
properties and boundary conditions, the solutions generated are only for approximations
purpose to the actual solution. Experimental data may be used to validate the results obtained
from numerical methods.

2.0

AIMS OF THE PROJECT

The objective of this project is to develop a three-dimensional finite element model of

composite plate in single lap-joint configuration. The plates are joined together by a single
bolt. A three-dimensional stress analysis is performed to analyse the behaviour of stress
around the vicinity of the bolt hole and through the thickness of the composite plate. The
strain and deformation behaviour of the bolted joint subjected under tensile loading is also
observed.

The finite element model of the joint is developed using general purpose finite
element tool ANSYS Mechanical APDL with pre- and post-processing capabilities. The
three-dimensional model consists of a single composite plate which is made of
graphite/epoxy laminates joined with an aluminium plate as suggested by various literatures
referred. The mechanical fastener joining both plates is a standard bolt made of aerospace
grade titanium. A thorough study on bolt modelling technique in finite element is also
conducted and best modelling approach is implemented.

The finite element model was designed through various configurations which gives
effect to the stress analysis result. Based on review through the literatures, design variables
in this project comprise of composite laminate layup and stacking, bolt hole diameter, and
distance from plate edge to bolt. A total of two finite element models of the bolted joint were
developed as the loadcase with different design variables as mentioned.

3.0

3.1

CRITICAL REVIEW

Finite element analysis of bolted composite joints

The study on the bolted joint of composite plates has begun in the past decades. Early
studies using the finite element method are based on two-dimensional analyses despite the
nature of the problem are in three-dimensional (Ireman, 1998). Before the advancement in
computer power systems, finite element analysis can only be conducted two-dimensionally
considering the complexity of the problem. Large amount of modelling need to be taken into
account for the analysis to be conducted in three-dimension, therefore requires great need of
computer power.

One of the significant studies of finite element analysis for composite plates was
conducted by Ireman (1998) who has developed a three-dimensional finite element model of
bolted composite joints to determine the non-uniform stress distributions of composite
laminates in the vicinity of a bolt hole. In the study, a bolted single lap joint consists of
composite laminate and metal has been considered. The composite laminate consists of
several fibre-reinforced unidirectional layers with ply orientations of 0, 90 and 45. For
the bolt, Ireman has considered two bolt design: Protruding and Countersunk. Both designs
gave different observations in terms of bearing load distribution and can be distinguished as
in Figure . The bearing load for protruding bolt is distributed over the entire thickness of the
laminate.

For the case of countersunk bolt, nearly all bearing load is carried by the

cylindrical part of the hole.

Modelling of the bolted composite joints has been done with a program called IDEAS
while the analyses were carried out using ABAQUS. The finite element model takes a
number of important features of a composite bolted joint into account such as contact,
friction, pre-tension, bolt type, stacking sequence, clearance and lateral support. Ireman
found that the three-dimensional finite element analysis is an important tool when throughthe-thickness effects in composite bolted joints are investigated. Through the finite element

modelling also, a convergence study including an in-plane mesh refinement was carried out
to investigate the influence of discretization on the strain distribution in the vicinity of the
hole.

To validate the result obtained from the finite element analysis, an experimental
program was conducted to measure deformation, strains, and bolt load on test specimens and
compared with the developed numerical model. A number of parameters such as laminate
layup, laminate thickness, bolt type, clamping force and lateral support were varied. Results
from both experimental and numerical modelling has shown a good agreement when
compared together, although from the experiments it is found that the composite joints
experience a secondary bending which is not obtained from the finite element modelling. It
was observed that results from finite element method show a linear form of increment, but the
case was not same from the experimental (i.e. non-linear displacement).

Ireman has

concluded also that the non-uniform stress distribution through the thickness of the laminate
is caused by the bending and tilting of the bolt due to the loading applied on the single lap
joint. The three-dimensional finite element study by Ireman has become a basis for other
finite element modelling and meshing of bolted composite joint.

Figure 3.1. Protruding bolt (right) and countersunk bolt (left) type. Source: Ireman (1998)

Another study was conducted by McCarthy (2005) to study the effects of bolt-hole
clearance on the mechanical behaviour of bolted composite joints. The composite consists of
combination of graphite-epoxy laminate and the joint type was single-bolt, single-lap which
is a standard configuration for composite joints. The study consists of two parts where for
the first part the finite element model was developed. The finite element analysis of the
generated model was performed in three-dimension due to the nature of the problem and
other factors such as bolt bending and tiling, bolt pre-load and stress and strains that vary
three-dimensionally. The finite element model was prepared using non-linear finite element
code program MSC.Marc. The modelling and meshing presented in the study is similar to
that used by Ireman (1998), except that for the washers were modelled separately. The
geometry of the joint was based on the ASTM standard D 5961/D 5961 M-96. Apart from
the finite element modelling, HTA/6376 carbon fibre/epoxy composites also was
manufactured for experimental validation

One important features of the finite element modelling during this study is the
definition of the contact bodies between the physical bodies that in contact with each other
(i.e. laminates, bolt, and washers) which have significant effects to clearance of bolt and the
joints. At the end of the second part it is found that the increased clearance leads to increased
bolt rotation, decreased bolt-hole contact area, and decreased joint stiffness. The clearance
also is shown to cause variations in stress distribution of the laminates, and these variations
are dependent on the lay-up.

The finite element method of analysing the single lap-joint of the composite plates in
three-dimensional by Ireman and McCarthy has similarity in terms of modelling and
meshing. The boundary condition and loading of the model are shown in Figure 3.2. Both
end of the joint are assumed perfectly gripped and applied with tensile loading.

To

demonstrate this condition in finite element method, the end of top laminate had all three
displacement degree of freedom fixed i.e. u=v=w=0. For the other end on bottom laminate, a
prescribed displacement in the x-direction is introduced to simulate a controlled loading. It is
shown from the study by Ireman and McCarthy that the degree of stresses around the vicinity
of the hole is dependent on several factors such as contacts, laminate stacking sequence,
clearance, et cetera. The efficiency of the result can be increased by refinement of the
meshing around the vicinity of the hole.

FIG. 3.2. Finite element modelling and meshing as introduced by Ireman (1998) and McCarthy (2005)

The finite element modelling and analysis of bolted composite joint by Ireman and
McCarthy both were done in finite element tools Abaqus and MSC.Marc. While for analysis
in finite element tool ANSYS, one was done by Tserpes (2002). In the study, a threedimensional progressive damage model (PDM) was developed which predicted and analysed
load-displacement curves and failure loads of a composite joint. A finite element analysis
conducted in the analysis was purposely to investigate two types of failure criteria, namely
Hashin-type criteria and Maximum Stress criteria on the tensile behaviour and strength of the
developed finite element model.

ANSYS finite element code was used in modelling the single-lap single-bot
graphite/epoxy composite laminates.

As referred from the work of Ireman, the joint

geometry consists of an upper plate made of fibre-reinforced graphite/epoxy composite

laminate while the bottom plate is aluminium. The bolt used was a protruding type similar to
the one modelled by Ireman. For the upper composite plate, the eight-noded SOLID46
layered element was used with three displacement degree of freedoms (DOFs) and is defined
by layer thickness, layer material direction angles and orthotropic material properties. For
the bottom plate and the bolt, SOLID45 element was used with three displacement DOFs per
node as well. To simulate the contact between each object in the modelling, CONTAC49

node-to-surface element was used.

Tserpes has implement the combined penalty plus

Langrange multiplier for the contact algorithm.

In the study, Tserpes has introduced three different configuration of the bolted joints
in which the variables are the bolt diameter, bolt-hole clearance, and the edge distance to the
bolt. Laminate stacking sequences are all the same but with different number of layers. In
this work it has been concluded that the most accurate result from the finite element
simulation using Progressive Damage Method was achieved by implementing Maximum
Stress failure criteria. The margin error from this simulation was the lowest when validated
with experimental result. In agreement to work by Ireman and McCarthy, variables such as
laminate stacking and layers, bolt-hole clearance and edge distance from the bolt gives
significant impact to stress behaviour and failure loads of the bolted composite joints.

3.2

Bolt modelling in finite element

One of the important features in mechanically fastened composite plates is the bolt
which holding both the plates together. To investigate the bolt in finite element method, the
bolt must be modelled together with the composite plates. Different approaches can be made
to model the bolt in finite element. A study has been performed by Kim (2007) in order to
investigate a modelling technique of the structure with bolted joints. The modelling of the
bolt was done in ANSYS finite element program using four kinds of finite element model as
referred in Figure 3.3 which is: solid bolt model, coupled bolt model, spider bolt model and
no bolt model. All these four kinds of bolt model were first introduced by Montgomerry
(2002).

Both Kim and Montgomerry agreed that two primary characteristics in the bolted joint
are pretension and mating part contact. All the four proposed bolt models take into account
these two primary characteristics.

In finite element modelling of the bolt, these two

characteristics are very important in order to accurately predict the physical behaviours of the
structure with a detailed three dimensional model of the bolt. However to put so much detail
in the modelling especially in large and complex structure may not be feasible due to
restriction in computational time and capability, hence these four bolt models were
introduced.
10

Among all the four bolt models, the solid bolt model which is modelled using 3D
solid elements provides the best accurate responses when compared and validated against
experimental data. It is the most realistic approach in modelling the bolt in finite element. In
ANSYS, Kim has modelled this bolt type using brick elements SOLID45 together with
CONTACT174 as the surface-to-surface contact elements and TARGE170 as target segment
elements. Kim has concluded that the solid bolt model could most accurately predict the
physical behaviour of the structure. With the study on bolted composite joint, the solid bolt
model approach can be implemented considering the simplicity of the structure.

FIGURE 3.3. Finite element models for the structure with a bolted joint. (a) Solid bolt model, (b) coupled bolt
model, (c) spider bolt model and (d) no-bolt model (Reference: Kim, 2007)

As Montgomery also suggested that solid bolt modelling is the most realistic approach
for modelling bolt in finite element, this is because solid bolt modelling captures thermal,
bending and tensile loads.

As mentioned before pretension is one of the primary

characteristics in bolt modelling. When the bolt holds two pieces of flanges or plates together
various loading conditions can result in separation of the bolted connections.

In finite

element analysis, the pretension is defined to the bolt to minimize this effect. When load

11

applied to the bolted connection, it will try to separate the connection. The pretension must
be more than the applied load otherwise the connection will separate.

Pretension is modelled using ANSYS pretension elements (PRETS179) which can be

used on solid or line element types. Surface-to-surface contact elements are used to account
for varying contact distribution along flanges. Bolt head and nut behaviour is modelled by
coupled nodes, beam elements, rigid body elements (RBE3), or solids. Bolt stud is modelled
by solid elements, beam elements, pipe elements or link elements. As solid bolt method is
very advantageous in terms of accuracy, its main drawback is it may add to more modelling
and run time due to the number of elements and nodes required. Therefore extra effort is
required in implementing this approach. However there are some characteristics ignored to
simplify the simulations such as the effect of threads.

The approach of modelling bolts in finite element introduced by Montgomery has

become the basis and reference in the study performed by Kim. Even though no specific
approach has become the industry standard but pretension and contact elements features in
ANSYS have helped in performing the bolted joint analysis in finite element.

12

4.0

4.1

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF BOLTED COMPOSITE JOINT

Problem Statement

Consider a bolted single lap joint consist of two plates (Figure 4.1). The upper plate
is made of composite laminate and the lower plate is metal. The composite laminate is made
of fibre-reinforced graphite/epoxy composite laminate as referred from Tserpes.

The

laminate ply orientations consist of 0, 45, and 90 with respect to global coordinate
system. Symmetrical laminations are implemented to the composite plate with respect to the
mid-surface. For the analysis the end of upper plate is loaded with pre-determined tensile
force while the end of lower plate is fixed. Loaded end of composite plate is only allowed to
displace in the x-direction.

The graphite/epoxy composite laminates was based on work by Tserpes which has the
elastic properties and strengths of HTA/6376 lamina as shown in the following table. The
material was specified by defining the elastic modulus E, shear modulus G, and Poissons
ratio v, of an orthotropic material. The metal plate is isotropic aluminium and the bolt used is
aerospace grade titanium as was used by Ireman and McCarthy.

TABLE 4.1
Material properties of HTA/6376 graphite/epoxy lamina used for the composite plate

Exx

Eyy

Ezz

Gxy

Gxz

Gyz

vxy

vxz

vyz

(GPa)

(GPa)

(GPa)

(GPa)

(GPa)

(GPa)

(GPa)

(GPa)

(GPa)

141

10

11

5.2

5.2

3.9

0.3

0.5

0.5

The overall length of each plate is L. Both composite and metal plate has the same
thickness t. Overall width of the plates is W. The protruding bolt head has the diameter D
and the bore diameter d. Distance between the bolt centre line and edge of the plate
measured in x-axis is e while h is measured along y-axis. The value of e and h is also equals
13

to W/2. An aerospace-grade titanium bolt is used to join the two plates together. The bolt is
the protruding-type head and made of elastic isotropic material with specified Youngs
modulus and Poissons ratio.

Figure 4.1. Geometric parameters of the bolted composite joint.

The bolted-joint was designed in two different configurations in order to study the
effects of design variables to the stress behaviour. Both configurations differ in terms of
width of the plates W, diameter of the bolt and the bolt-hole d, and the edge to distance
horizontally and transversely (e and h). The bolt is assumed to have a perfect fit within the
hole where there are no bolt clearance effects. The laminate layup and stacking sequences in
both configurations remains the same. The geometrical data and stacking sequences for both
configurations are displayed in following table.

TABLE 4.2
Joint configuration and geometric description

Set

Stacking
sequence

L
(mm)

W
(mm)

D
(mm)

d
(mm)

e
(mm)

h
(mm)

H
(mm)

t
(mm)

(0/90/45)S

100

36

11.8

18

18

36

4.16

(0/90/45)S

100

60

17.8

10.0

30

30

60

4.16

14

4.2

Finite Element Model

Many literature works on bolted composite joint reviewed so far agreed that stress
state in the vicinity of hole in bolted joint is three-dimensional. Therefore three-dimensional
model is developed to analyse the stress behaviour, which cannot be considered on twodimensional model. The finite element model of the joint was developed using ANSYS
Mechanical APDL finite element tools. This program allows user to perform the finite
element analysis in two modes, which is the Graphical User Interface (GUI) and Batch
Mode.

The combination of these two modes are very advantageous where user can interact

with the graphical interface while at the same time utilising the parameters and programming
command of the Input File written in ANSYS Parametric Design Language (Madenci, 2006).

The developed model consists of the plates and bolt is shown in Figure 4.2. The joint
geometry was based on the works by Tserpes and McCarthy which is referred from the
developed geometry by Ireman. For the modelling of the metal plate and solid bolt, element
type SOLID185 was used.

It is a three-dimensional eight-noded element with three

displacement degree of freedoms (DOFs). Available in two forms, SOLID185 homogenous

structural solid is implemented for modelling the structural solid structure of the aluminium
plate.

For the composite plate element type SOLID186 which is the layered version of
SOLID185 was used. Three DOFs is also utilised and the element type is defined by layer
thickness, laminate stacking sequence along with orthotropic material properties as
mentioned above. SOLID186 is designed to model layered solids and allows up to 20
uniform-thickness layers per element.

The element also is available in two forms as

SOLID185 but layered structural solid key option is implemented.

15

Figure 4.2. Developed geometry of the bolted joint

Both the laminate and metal plate is in contact with the bolt. The contact region is
shown in Figure 4.3 which involved the contact between the two plates and between the bolt
and the inside surface of the plates hole. The contact surfaces are indicated by the shaded
red line and the numbers indicate three different contact surface combinations. For the
analysis in ANSYS, these contact regions must be defined so that the program understands
there is a contact and friction coefficient applies. To simulate the contact between those
surfaces element type CONTA175 node-to-surface contact element was used. By default, the
augmented Lagrangian contact algorithm is implemented which differs from the work of
Tserpes who used penalty plus Lagrange multiplier.

Figure 4.3. Contact surfaces highlighted in red.

16

4.3

Analysis and Procedures

The procedures for analysis of bolted composite joint in ANSYS can be summarised
in the following flowchart (Figure 4.4). All the steps in the flowchart have been done by
utilising the combination of graphic user interface and the batch mode in ANSYS. Generally
there are three main steps in a typical ANSYS analysis which are model generation, solution,
and results review. These steps involved various sub-steps and correspond to a specific
processor levels in ANSYS as shown in the figure (Madenci, 2006). The analysis of bolted
composite joint has been executed according to the process flowchart below.

Figure 4.4. Process flowchart for the analysis of bolted composite in ANSYS

17

4.3.1 Preprocessor

Three types of elements were defined which correspond to the composite plate, metal
plate, and the bolt initially. Contact Elements were added into the list of element types as the
process progress through.

As discussed before all the elements consist of SOLID185,

SOLID186 and CONTA175 element type.

For the composite plate which using the

SOLID186 element, layered structural solid key option was chosen. Once all the element
types have been identified, material properties or the joint materials were defined. The
ANSYS input file for defining the element types and material properties is as follows.
/TITLE, Analysis of bolted
composite joint

! Define title for the analysis

/PREP7
/UNITS, USER, 0.001

! Enter the Preprocessor option.

! Let ANSYS read the unit as mm

ET, 1, SOLID185
ET, 2, SOLID186
ET, 3, SOLID185

! Element type 1 for the metal plate

! Element type 2 for the composite plate
! Element type 3 for the bolt

KEYOPT, 2, 3, 1

!Select Structural Layered Solid for

element 2 (composite)

MP, EX,
1, 68.9e9
MP, PRXY, 1, 0.33
MP, DENS, 1, 2700

Material properties for isotropic aluminium

! Input elastic modulus, E value
! Poissons ratio, v value
! Input density value

MP,
MP,
MP,
MP,
MP,
MP,
MP,
MP,
MP,
MP,

! Input material properties for orthotropic

graphite/epoxy lamina as in Table 4.1

EX,
EY,
EX,
PRXY,
PRYZ,
PRXZ,
GXY,
GYZ,
GXZ,
DENS,

2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,

141e09
10e09
11e09
0.3
0.5
0.5
5.2e09
3.9e09
5.2e09
1130

MP, EX,
3, 110e9
MP, PRXY, 3, 0.29
MP, DENS, 3, 4430

! Input material properties for the isotropic

titanium bolt

18

The composite plate consists of several laminas forming a graphite/epoxy laminate.

Each plies of lamina were stacked together on each other with layup angle respectively. The
stacking sequence of the composite laminate was carried out using the Create and Modify
Shell Sections tools from the ANSYS Main Menu interface. No specified ANSYS command
are available to define the laminate stacking sequence hence the GUI need to be utilised by
the following: Preprocessor > Sections > Shell > Lay-up > Add/Edit. In the windows, each
plies of the lamina were defined by their respective thickness and layup angle.

Figure 4.5. Layer stacking of each plies forming the composite plate

Once the element type to be used has been identified and the properties of each
material were defined, modelling and meshing of the generated model was performed. The
bolted model comprise of three individual items aluminium plate, composite plate, and
titanium bolt. The bolted joint was modelled to simulate a clamped joint on both end. To
eliminate complexity and time consumed for the analysis, the clamped region is not modelled
in the finite element. Modelling was performed using the Create Volume GUI. Meshing
was done using the mesh tool and mapped meshing was selected as in Figure 4.6. The input
file was also prepared to model all the three items and implement mapped-meshing.
MAT, 1
TYPE, 1

! Sets the element material and type

attribute referring to aluminium (ET 1).

BLOCK, 0, 18, 0, 18, 0, -4.16

CYLIND, 3, , 0, -4.16, 90, ,

! Create BLOCK with specified dimension.

! Create cylinder overlapping the block.
19

VSBV, 1, 2
ACCAT, 4, 6
LESIZE, 15,
LESIZE, 16,
LESIZE, 2 ,
LESIZE, 3 ,
LESIZE, 6 ,
LESIZE, 7 ,
LESIZE, 10,
LESIZE, 11,
LESIZE, 12,
LESIZE, 19,
LESIZE, 20,
LESIZE, 22,
LESIZE, 23,
LESIZE, 24,
LESIZE, 25,

! Remove the cylinder from the block.

! Concatenate area from the block.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

6,
6,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

! Specifies the divisions and spacing of the

lines in the volume to simplify the mapped
meshing.

MSHKEY, 1
VMESH, ALL
VSYMM, X, ALL
VSYMM, Y, ALL
NUMCMP, VOLU

! Select mapped meshing to be used.

! Mesh the selected volumes.
! Generate new volumes by symmetry
reflection on x- and y-axis.
! Compress the volume number.

BLOCK, 18, 32, 18,-18, 0 ,-4.16

! Create another BLOCK for the nonoverlapping section of the plate.

LESIZE,
LESIZE,
LESIZE,
LESIZE,
LESIZE,
LESIZE,
LESIZE,
LESIZE,
LESIZE,
LESIZE,
LESIZE,
LESIZE,

! Specifies the divisions and spacing of the

lines in the volume.

63,
65,
68,
71,
64,
66,
67,
69,
71,
72,
73,
74,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

6,
6,
6,
6,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

VMESH, 5
NUMMRG, NODE

! Mesh the selected volume.

! Merge all coincident nodes.

MAT, 2
TYPE, 2

Composite plate modelled using the same

steps as in aluminium plate.
! Sets the element material and type
attribute referring to the composite (ET 2).

BLOCK, 0, 18, 0, 18, 0, 4.16

CYLIND, 3, , 0, 4.16, 90, ,
VSBV, 6, 7
NUMCMP, VOLU
ACCAT, 26, 37
LESIZE, 58, , , 6, , , , , 0
LESIZE, 59, , , 6, , , , , 0
20

LESIZE, 27, , ,
LESIZE, 28, , ,
LESIZE, 37, , ,
LESIZE, 38, , ,
LESIZE, 51, , ,
LESIZE, 52, , ,
LESIZE, 53, , ,
LESIZE, 75, , ,
LESIZE, 76, , ,
LESIZE, 80, , ,
LESIZE, 81, , ,
LESIZE, 79, , ,
LESIZE, 79, , ,
VMESH, 6
VSYMM, X, 6
VSYMM, Y, 6, 7

3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

BLOCK,-18 ,-32,-18,
LESIZE, 119, , , 6,
LESIZE, 121, , , 6,
LESIZE, 124, , , 6,
LESIZE, 126, , , 6,
LESIZE, 127, , , 3,
LESIZE, 128, , , 3,
LESIZE, 129, , , 3,
LESIZE, 130, , , 3,
LESIZE, 120, , , 3,
LESIZE, 122, , , 3,
LESIZE, 123, , , 3,
LESIZE, 125, , , 3,
VMESH, 10

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

18,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0, 4.16
, , 0
, , 0
, , 0
, , 0
, , 0
, , 0
, , 0
, , 0
, , 0
, , 0
, , 0
, , 0

VSEL, S, VOLU, , 6, 10 , , 1
NUMMRG, NODE
ALLSEL
MAT, 3
TYPE, 3
CYLIND, 3, , -7.16, 7.16, 0,
LESIZE, 137, , , 14, , , , ,
LESIZE, 138, , , 14, , , , ,
LESIZE, 139, , , 14, , , , ,
VSYM, x, 11
VSYM, Y, 11, 12
VGLUE, 11, 12, 13, 14
NUMCMP, VOLU

! Sets the element material and type

attribute for the titanium bolt (ET 2).
90
0
0
0

CYLIND,3,5.9,4.16,7.16, 0, 90
VSYM, x, 15
VSYM, Y, 15, 16
VGLUE, 15, 16, 17, 18
NUMCMP, VOLU

! Create cylinder
! Specifies the divisions and spacing of the
lines in the volume.
! Generate new volumes by symmetry
reflection on x- and y-axis.
! Glue selected volumes
! Compress the volume numbers
! Create another cylinder for the bolt head.
! Reflect the volumes in x- and y-axis
! Glue selected volumes
! Compress volume number.

21

CYLIND,3,5.9,-4.16,-7.16, 0, 90
VSYM, x, 19
VSYM, Y, 19, 20
VGLUE, 19, 20, 21, 22
NUMCMP, VOLU
VMESH, 11, 22

! Create new volume for the washer

VSEL, S, VOLU, , 11,22 , , 1

NUMMRG, NODE
ALLSEL

! Select the meshed bolt.

! Merge all coincident nodes.
! Select everything to appear in GUI.

! Reflect the volumes in x- and y-axis

! Glue selected volumes
! Compress volume number.
! Mesh all the volumes generated for bolt

Figure 4.6. Individual meshing of each geometry forming the bolted joint.

Contact between each interacting objects in the bolted joint was defined upon the
completion of model generation and meshing. The contact surface was identified based on
Figure 4.3. Contact definition between surfaces was performed using the Contact Wizard in
main menu which can be accessed from: Preprocessor > Modelling > Create > Contact Pair.
Prior to setting up the contact surface in the Contact Wizard, a group of nodes will be
identified as the Contact and Target nodal component. Input file was prepared to select
the nodal component and Table 4.3 specifies the contact and the pairing surfaces involved in
the Contact Wizard setup.
VSEL, S, VOLU, , 11, 14, , 1
NSEL,R,LOC,Z, -4.16, 4.16,,,
CSYS, 1

! Select the bolts bore meshed volume

! Select the nodes at the specified location.
! Change into cylindrical global Cartesian.
22

NSEL, R, LOC, X, 3.0, 3.0

CM , BORE_CONTA, NODE
CSYS, 0

! Select the nodes at the outer surface.

! Name this group of nodes as CONTACT.
! Change back into normal Cartesian.

VSEL, S, VOLU, , 15, 18, , 1

NSEL, R,LOC,Z,4.16,4.16, , ,
CM , BOLTHEAD_CONTA, NODE

! Select the meshed volume of the bolt head

! Select the nodes in contact with composite
! Name this group of nodes as CONTACT

VSEL, S, VOLU, , 19, 22, , 1

NSEL, R,LOC,Z,-4.16,-4.16,,,
CM , WASHER_CONTA, NODE

! Select the meshed volume of the washer

! Select nodes in contact with metal plate
! Name this group of nodes as CONTACT

VSEL,
CSYS,
NSEL,
CM ,
CSYS,

! Select the meshed composite and metal

! Change into cylindrical Cartesian system
! Select nodes on inner hole of both plates
! Name this group of nodes as TARGET
! Return to normal Cartesian coordinate.

S, VOLU, , 1, 10, , 1
1
R, LOC, X, 3.0, 3.0
INNERHOLE_TARGE, Node
0

VSEL, S, VOLU, , 1, 5, , 1
NSEL, R,LOC,Z,-4.16,-4.16,,,
CM , AL-WASHER_TARGE, NODE

! Select the meshed metal plate

! Select nodes in contact with the washer
! Name this group of nodes as TARGET

VSEL, S, VOLU, , 6, 10, , 1

NSEL, R,LOC,Z,4.16,4.16, , ,
CM , COMP-BHEAD_TARGE, NODE

! Select the meshed composite plate

! Select the nodes in contact with bolt head
! Name this group of nodes as TARGET

VSEL, S, VOLU, , 1, 4, , 1
NSEL, R, LOC, Z, 0, 0, , ,
CM , AL-COMPO_TARGE, NODE

! Select the meshed metal plate

! Select nodes in contact with composite
! Name this group of nodes as TARGET

VSEL, S, VOLU, , 6, 9, , 1
NSEL, R, LOC, Z, 0, 0, , ,
CM , COMPO-AL_CONTA, NODE

! Select the meshed composite plate

! Select nodes in contact with metal plate
! Name this group of nodes as CONTACT

Referring to Table 4.3, a total of four contact pairs were created.

The contact

behaviour between each interacting contact surface was defined as standard with the friction
coefficient was assumed to be 0.2. The Node-to-Surface contact type was chosen and the
contact elements and target elements were generated afterwards.

For Node-to-Surface

contact type, contact element CONTA175 was generated while TARGE170 was used as the
target element. Augmented Lagrange method was chosen as the contact algorithm and the
contact nodes normal to target surface option was implemented.

23

Table 4.3
Contact surfaces generated from the Contact Manager wizard.

ID

Contact
Behaviour

Contact
Type

Contact
Surface

Target
Surface

Standard

Nod-Surf

Bolt head

Standard

Nod-Surf

Bolt bore

Standard

Nod-Surf

Bolt washer

Standard

Nod-Surf

Composite
plate

Composite
plate
Inner hole of
both plates
Aluminium
plate
Aluminium
plate

Contact
Element

Target
Element

CONTA175

TARGE170

CONTA175

TARGE170

CONTA175

TARGE170

CONTA175

TARGE170

The type of contact can be generally classified into two categories namely rigid-toflexible and flexible-to-flexible. For this bolted composite joint flexible-to-flexible contact
classification was chosen since the contacting bodies are deformable. Depending on the
contact classification, the Contact and Target surfaces designation are subjected to condition
and guidelines specified by ANSYS. For rigid-to-flexible type of contact, the flexible surface
always is the Contact while the rigid assigned as the Target. As for the flexible-to-flexible
contact, the Contact is the surface with finer mesh compared to the Target, which in this case
the bolt are having finer mesh than the plates therefore it is assigned as the Contact.

4.3.2 Solution Processor

The Solution processor was used to obtain the solution for the finite element model
generated in the Preprocessor. Significant tasks accomplished during solution processor
included defining analysis type, specifying the boundary conditions and applying SOLVE
command to obtain solution. The type of analysis chosen for this bolted joint is static
analysis where a single load of force was applied. The load and boundary conditions were
defined before the solution was obtained. Figure 4.7 shows all the boundary conditions
defined on the joint geometry.

On one end of the joint (aluminium end), the joint is

constrained on all displacement DOFs to simulate the stationary grip. The other end of the
joint (composite end), a magnitude of force in x-direction (Fx) was applied to simulate the
tensile force on the joint. A single force magnitude of 8 kN was selected to be applied on the
joint which is translated into distributed force (in N/mm2) along the end of the composite
plate.
24

Figure 4.7. Defined boundary conditions for the bolted joint

The ANSYS command for the Input File was prepared in the following. Since the
joint involved contact pairs between three different geometries it is necessary to provide
solution time controls through the DELTIM command for convergence and overall
efficiency.

Once all the boundary conditions are satisfied the SOLVE command was

executed to run the solutions and obtain the results.

/SOLU
ANTYPE, STATIC, NEW

! Enter the solution processor

! Select new Static analysis

NSEL,S,LOC,X,32-1E-4,32+1E-4

! Select the group of nodes to be assigned

with boundary conditions
! Constrain all displacement DOFs
! Select and show everything on GUI

D, ALL, ALL, 0.0

ALLSEL

SF, ALL, PRES, -53.419

ALLSEL

! Select another group of nodes to assign

other boundary conditions.
! Apply tensile pressure to composite end.
! Select and show everything on GUI

AUTOTS, ON
SOLCONTROL, 1, 0, ,
DELTIM, 1, , ,

! Activate automatic time-stepping

! Activate optimised nonlinear solution
! Specify time step sizes to be used

SOLVE

! Run the solutions

NSEL,S,LOC,X,-32-1E-4,-32+1E-4

25

4.3.3 General Postprocessor Result Data

The results for the analysis of the bolted-joint are generally viewed under the General
Postprocessor. The results can be viewed in terms of plotting of contours, vector displays,
deformed shaped and displacement, as well as listings of the results in tabular form. From
the analysis of this bolted composite joint, the results between the sets of the joint were
compared and presented for the report in form of:

i.

Deformation of the joint

ii.

Stress component in the vicinity of the hole

iii.

Stress intensity through the thickness of the plate

iv.

Total mechanical strain.

The first comparison made between bolted-joint Set A and Set B is the deformation
behaviour before and after the tensile force has been applied.

Figure 4.8 shows the

undeformed and deformed body of the joint geometry for both Set A and B. Secondary
bending was observed occurred after the tensile load application, in agreement with every
literatures discussing on the behaviour of bolted joint after tensile loading. The end of the
joint which force was applied also having the highest sums of vector displacement due to the
bending effect shown as the colour gradient in the figure.

Figure 4.8. Deformation shape and gradients of Set A (a) & (c) and Set B (b) & (d) after load applied.

26

Stress component in each direction were compared between the two sets as Figure 4.9
below. Each set have their respective stress contour around the vicinity of the hole. The
pattern in the stress contour shows different magnitude of stress.

The magnitudes of

tensional stress are increasing towards the red contour and magnitudes of compressive stress
are increasing towards the blue contour. One thing in common observed in the two sets is
the location of maximum stresses in occurred through the half-thickness of the plate.

Figure 4.9. Stress contours in x-, y-, and z-components for Set A (top row) and Set B (bottom row)

Intensity of the stress around the region of the hole is observed in Figure 4.10. In the
case of stress intensity observation, no compressive stresses are recorded. The blue contour
refers to the minimum value of tensional stress over the plate. From the stress contour it can
be seen that Set B produced larger area of intensity towards tensional but with lower
maximum stress value. Whereas in Set A, maximum stress value is higher but intensifies
within smaller area through the composite plate.

27

Figure 4.10. Stress intensity around the vicinity of the hole

Total mechanical strain are compared between Set A and Set B. Figure 4.11 shows
the total mechanical strain intensity from the cut out point of view of the joint.

The

maximum value of mechanical strain intensity is found in the region shown in the figure.
Again the comparison case is same between the two sets. The strain intensity concentrated
on smaller area through the thickness in Set A, and go for a wider area in Set B. The
intensity of the strain is much affected by the displacement and elongation of the joint itself
after the load was applied.

Figure 4.11. Total mechanical strain intensity through the thickness of the joint

28

Investigation on the bolt also was made by taking the Von Mises stress reading to
compare it with the materials yield stress. From the comparison later on it can be decided
whether the bolt is safe to be used or otherwise.

Figure 4.12. Von Mises stress of the bolt

29

5.0

RESULT DISCUSSION

The analysis of bolted composite joint exhibit a non-linear behaviour and requires
non-linear solution when the SOLVE command was executed depending on the circumstances
and occurrences. According to Madenci (2006) non-linear structural behaviour may arise
because of factors including the geometry and the material itself. Change in the boundary
conditions and structural integrity may contribute to the non-linearity as well. In terms of the
geometry, there are two main types of non-linearity: Large deflection and rotation and stress
stiffening. The non-linearity nature of the bolted composite joint are due to stress stiffening
where stress in one direction affects the stiffness in another direction as in the case of
orthotropic composite material.

Secondary bending can be defined as the bending caused by the tensile load on the
joint. As observed in Figure 4.8 it was obvious that secondary bending occurs due to
eccentricity when loaded in tension. From the work of Ireman (1998), secondary bending can
be determined by the following formula:

. [1]
Where L is the strain value at the lower surface of the composite plate and U is the
strain value at the upper surface of the composite plate. Both strain value was taken as the
Von Mises total mechanical strain from ANSYS nodal solution value in Table 5.1. Ireman
also suggested support plate to be modelled in the finite element to avoid or reduce the effect
of secondary bending to the joint. This plate acts as lateral support and modelled as perfectly
rigid. It was found later that the support plate unable to prevent the secondary bending from
occurring in the analysis and disagreement was found between readings from the experiment
and finite element analysis. Therefore in this bolted composite analysis, the modelling of
support plate was negligible and the secondary bending phenomena was observed and
compared.

30

Table 5.1
Von Mises strain on surface of the composite plate and the secondary bending value.

Item

SET A

SET B

Von Mises strain (lower surface)

0.3827 x 10-7

0.1125 x 10-7

Von Mises strain (upper surface)

0.1385 x 10-7

0.9223 x 10-8

0.4685

0.0896

Secondary Bending

The secondary bending reading was calculated based on the equation [1] as above and
recorded in Table 5.1 by comparing between both sets. It was observed that Set A having a
higher secondary bending reading as compared to Set B despite having a smaller geometric
parameters. Lower bending value in Set B might be due to higher stiffness of the geometry
which is larger than Set A.

A table of summary is provided below showing all magnitude value of result obtained
in the above for comparison between both set. The value in the table gives the maximum
reading from the postprocessor nodal solution.

Table 5.2
Summary of selected stress and strain obtained from ANSYS general postprocessor.

Value
General Postprocessor
SET A
2.52 x 10-6 mm

Displacement vector sum

SET B
2.81 x 10-6 mm

x-component stress

1103.66 MPa

586.42 MPa

y-component stress

1115.21 MPa

538.43 MPa

z-component stress

65.06 MPa

34.75 MPa

Stress intensity

1261.77 MPa

606.2 MPa

Von Mises stress

1213.49 MPa

593.78 MPa

Mechanical strain intensity

4.99 x 10-8

2.63 x 10-8

Von Mises strain

4.27 x 10-8

2.24 x 10-8

31

Readings from the general postprocessor shows that displacement vector sum is
higher for Set B. Longer joints tends to displaced more when applied to tensile loading
although the secondary bending value is much lower than Set A. Therefore increased length
will increased the displacement but bending rate is decreased with increased width.

Assessment on the maximum stress which occurred around the bolt hole (Figure 4.9)
in every direction shows a similar pattern. Both Set A and B were applied uniform tensile
load of 8 kN which distributed along the surface area (width x thickness) of the composites
end. Results show that stress in each component for Set B were consistently lower than in
Set A. Higher geometry parameters of Set B in terms of width and bolt diameter which
proportionally increase surface area has shown a reduction around 46% to 52% of stress
value. Similar case also happened for the stress intensity and the Von Mises stress value
where reduction up to 52% and 51% respectively in Set B.
The strain behaviour doesnt differ from what has been observed with the stress.
Reduction of total mechanical strain intensity about 47% in Set B as compared to Set A while
the Von Mises strain also reduced at the same rate. From the stress and strain result obtained
from the finite element analysis it can be relate that an increase in geometry parameters i.e.
the edge distance and bolt diameter up to 67% from the original geometry (Set A) has led to
reduction in stress and strain around 47% to 52%.

The bolt used in the analysis was assessed whether the material will yield when
subjected to the loading condition. From the general processor, the value for Von Mises
stress can be obtained and compared with the materials yield stress as in Table 5.3 below.

Table 5.3
Comparison of bolts Von Mises stress with material yield stress (source: ASM)

Bolt Ti-6AI-4V (Grade 5)

Von Mises stress

Set A

1840.72 MPa

Set B

959.27 MPa

Yield stress

Safe Design
*Fail

1100 MPa

32

Pass

From the table above the Von Mises stress for set A is higher than the materials yield
stress itself. However this doesnt necessarily mean the bolt has failed the safe design
criteria. Referred to Figure 4.12, the maximum Von Mises stress occurred at the tip of the
bolt, far from the critical design region which is the connection between bolt head and the
bore. At those region, the Von Mises stress value was recorded as lower than 200 MPa, far
lower than the material yield stress. The safe design criteria in Set B was decided as passed
since the Von Mises stress is lower than the materials yield stress. In addition, it was
observed that an increased bolt diameter has reduced the stress suffered by the bolt.

Utilising the Batch Mode in ANSYS was very advantageous in easing the process and
procedures to implement finite element analysis of the bolted joint. The prepared Input File
using list of commands enable the users to monitor and made any modifications required
during the modelling and analysis. The Batch Mode is best used in combination with the
Graphical User Interface to have the view on the progress of the analysis. Observation on
the results was done by fully utilising the GUI to see the behaviour of the bolted joint after
analysis was run.

Care has to be taken before any ANSYS session by noticing the standard system of
units set as default in the program. Using the wrong unit measurements will highly impact
the result obtained. The units system can be checked by the users using the /STATUS,
UNITS command in the input field. By default the units used in the program are meters
(length), kilogram (mass), second (time), and Newton (force). A conversion factor of 0.001
has been input in the command line so that the program will read all the unit of measurement
as millimetres.

The geometry of the bolted joint is very challenging in implementing the Mapped
Meshing method. However as long as the regularity conditions of the mapped meshing are
met, the meshing was achievable. Mapped meshed provides lots of control over the meshing
and elements compared to Free Meshing method thus providing more accurate results. Poor
aspect ratio can be eliminated besides giving a good presentation of the meshed geometry.
The only drawback of using this meshing method is it takes more time to create the meshing
over the geometry.

33

The Node-to-Surface contact elements were used instead of Surface-to-Surface

contact elements. No comparison was made between those two types of contact elements in
term of efficiency of the solution. However observation was made between the two contact
element types in form of time taken to complete the solution. The Node-to-Surface contact
element was found to have higher cumulative iteration number to find the solution, therefore
longer time to convergence. In this case, applying the Surface-to-Surface contact elements
will increase the non-linearity of the analysis. For time saving, Node-to-Surface contact
elements were applied to all contact surfaces.

An attempt to compare the result between two different mesh densities also has been
made. As suggested by McCarthy (2005), refined mesh density and increased element order
can improved the bending behaviour as observed in Figure 4.8. However this improvement
modification was not successful due to the failure of the solver to achieve convergence which
is due to high non-linearity and much iteration required. Therefore the effect of meshing
density and refinement towards the behaviour of the bending and stress result were unable to
be investigated.

34

6.0

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In this report, a three-dimensional finite element model of a bolted joint consist of a

composite plate has been developed.

The purpose of the finite element analysis is to

investigate the effect of changing geometric parameters to the stress and strain behaviour
when the joint was subjected to tensile pressure. The tensile load applied simulates the
tensile testing as performed in any conventional lab tensile test. Besides assessing the stress
around the hole, three-dimensional model was developed so that the stress behaviour can also
be observed through the thickness of the plate. The main parameters observed from the
results including the deformation and secondary bending, stress component and intensity and
strain behaviour.

The finite element model was generated using finite element package ANSYS APDL
utilising both the graphical user interface and the batch mode input file. The finite element
model taken into account a few important features a composite bolted-joint should have
including the contact surfaces, friction between plates and bolt, bolt type and laminate
stacking sequence. However some other parameters were also neglected during the analysis
such as bolt pre-tension, bolt clearance (bolt assumed perfectly fit), and lateral support to
eliminate secondary bending.

Two load cases were developed namely Set A and Set B which have different
geometric parameters in terms of width and edge distance. Earlier study from the literature
provided that an increase in joint dimension will improved stress behaviour. An agreement
was found from the result shown that increase of plate width and edge distance up to 67%
will reduced the maximum stress around the bolt and hole up to 52% than initial stress value
when subjected to same magnitude of tensile load to the joint. Therefore a joint with longer
edge distance can withstand higher loading and better resistance to failure by shear-out and
net-tension.

35

Upon the completion of finite element analysis of bolted composite joint, a number of
recommendations can be considered for the purpose of future works as follows:

1. Pre-load/pre-tension of the bolt must be taken into consideration when modelling the
solid bolt. As been discussed before bolt pre-tension is one of the two primary
characteristics in bolted-joint apart from the contact pair. Defining the pre-tension to
the joint can realistically improve the behaviour of the joint during the analysis.

2. Bolt clearance also is another factor that affecting the behaviour of the bolted joint.
Variations in the bolt-hole clearance can be investigate to analyse the effect of the
clearance to the stiffness and load distribution around the hole.

3. An in-depth mesh efficiency study should be carried out to determine the most
efficient meshing density before the finite element analysis are performed.

An

attempt to analyse the effect of mesh density variations in this project found a deadend since the program solver was unable to converge.

4. It is very essential to validate the result obtained from finite element analysis with the
available experimental result. If both finite element and laboratory result can achieve
agreement it can be confirmed that the methodology of the finite element analysis
were done correctly.
5. A failure criteria can be developed in the finite element program to investigate the
extent of loads in which the joint able to withstand thus determining the strength of
the joint design to withstand a prescribed loading.

36

REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

ANSYS, Inc. (2011). ANSYS Parametric Design Language Guide. Canonsburg: ANSYS, Inc.
ANSYS, Inc. (2014, 7 24). ANSYS Conference Papers. Retrieved 7 24, 2014, from ansys.net:
http://ansys.net/collection/832
ASM Aerospace Specification Metals, Inc. (2014, August 28). Titanium Ti-6Al-4V (Grade 5)
specifications. Retrieved from ASM Aerospace Specification Metals Web site:
http://asm.matweb.com/search/SpecificMaterial.asp?bassnum=MTP642
Barbero, E. J. (2014). Finite element analysis of composite materials using ANSYS (2nd ed.).
Boca Raton, Florida, United States of America: CRC Press.
Broughton, W. R., Crocker, L. E., & Gower, M. R. (2002). Design Requirements for Bonded
and Bolted Composite Structure. Teddington, Middlesex: National Physical
Laboratory.
Ireman, T. (1998). Three-dimensional stress analysis of bolted single-lap composite joints.
Composite Structures 43, 195-216.
Ireman, T. (1999). Design of Composite Structures Containing Bolt Holes and Open Holes.
Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Aeronautics. Stockholm: Royal
Institute of Technology.
Kalarikkal, G. S. (2004). Fracture Toughness of Graphite/Epoxy Laminates at Cryogenic
Conditions. Florida: University of Florida.
Kim, J., Yoon, J.-C., & Kang, B.-S. (2007). Finite element analysis and modelling of
structures with bolted joints. Applied Mathematical Modelling 31, 895-911.
Madenci, E., & Guven, I. (2006). The Finite Element Method and Applications in
Engineering Using ANSYS. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.
McCarthy, C. T., & McCarthy, M. A. (2005). Three-dimensional finite element analysis of
single-bolt, single lap composite bolted joints: Part II--effects of bolt-hole clearance.
Composite Structures 71, 159-175.
McCarthy, M. A., McCarthy, C. T., Lawlor, V. P., & Stanley, W. F. (2005). Threedimensional finite element analysis of single-bolt, single-lap composite bolted joints:
part I-model development and validation. Composite Structures 71, 140-158.
Montgomery, J. (2014, 3 12). Methods for Modeling Bolts in the Bolted Joint. Retrieved from
ANSYS Resource Library:
http://www.ansys.com/Resource+Library/Conference+Papers/Methods+for+Modelin
g+Bolts+in+the+Bolted+Joint
37

Pakdil, M. (2009). Failure analysis of composite single bolted-joints subected to bolt

pretension. India Journal of Engineering & Material Sciences, 79-85.
Rosner, C. N. (1992). Single-bolted connections for orthotropic fibre-reinforced composite
structural members. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba.
Tserpes, K. I., Labeas, G., Papanikos, P., & Kermanidis, T. (2002). Strength prediction of
bolted joints in graphite/epoxy composite laminates. Composites: Part B 33, 521-529.
Tserpes, K. I., Papanikos, P., & Kermanidis, T. (2001). A three-dimensional progressive
damage model for the bolted joint in composite laminates subjected to tensile loading.
Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 24, 663-675.

38