Bolted Joints

Related terms:

Bolts, Explosions, Fasteners, Temperature, Clamped Plate, Failure Mode, Polymer,

Bolt Hole, Laminate

View all Topics

Learn more about Bolted Joints

Steel
Peter A. Claisse, in Civil Engineering Materials, 2016

30.8.2 Bolted joints

Bolted joints are common in steelwork (Fig. 30.11), and care should be taken to
ensure that the correct bolts are used. Standard “black” bolts are used for normal
connections, and generally carry loads in shear, but are generally specified by their
tensile strength. Care should be taken that the specified bolts (and nuts) are not
mixed with ungraded bolts that may be on site for other purposes. High strength
friction grip bolts (and nuts) are made from higher-grade steel, and are torqued to
transfer loads by friction between the steel members.
Figure 30.11. A Typical Bolted Joint in a Steel Frame

> Read full chapter

Maximizing Machinery Uptime

In Practical Machinery Management for Process Plants, 2006

Locking or Holding Mechanism Failure

Reciprocating compressors utilize bolted joints to unite the various component
assemblies into one structure. Therefore, there is a high dependence upon bolted
joint integrity to maintain reliable operation and any loosening of these joints makes
a mechanical failure inevitable. Estimates of compressor failures due to this failure
mode alone vary from 10 to 20% of all recorded failures. To improve bolted joint
reliability, and achieve a significant reduction in failure incidence, the design of all
joints must be analyzed carefully and a maximum incorporation of reliable design
details should be done.

Designing Out Looseness.

By applying the integral design approach, a design study of the machine should be
made to minimize the number of bolted joints and change to one-piece compo-
nents. An example of this is to specify one-piece valve cage-cover designs as opposed
to the standard two-piece construction (Fig. 13-16).
Figure 13-16. One piece valve cage cover (Cook Manley).

Resisting Loosening Failures.

The vast majority of failures in reciprocating compressor joints are due to a loss of
bolt/stud tension arising from joint relaxation and vibration loosening. These factors
are caused by the following:

• A low design elasticity of the bolt/stud connection.

• Embedment of joint surfaces and nut surface.

• Insufficient thread engagement.

• Oversized holes.

• Temperature cycling of the joint.

• Excessive joint surfaces.

• Vibration overcoming the friction forces between the nut and stud threads,
leading to nut rotation.

> Read full chapter

Design and Analysis of Metric Bolted

Joints
Yung-Li Lee, Hsin-Chung Ho, in Metal Fatigue Analysis Handbook, 2012

Overview of Bolted Joints and Mechanical Properties

The ISO metric bolted joints and their mechanical properties are presented in this
section as background information. Figure 12.1 shows the nomenclature for ISO
metric threads. The ISO threads can be described in the form of M d × P and a coarse
pitch is assumed when P is omitted in the specification. The following parameters
are used to define the ISO metric thread geometry:

H = height of fundamental triangle in mm

P = pitch in mm
D = major diameter of internal threads (nut) in mm
D1 = minor diameter of internal threads in mm
D2 = pitch diameter of internal threads in mm
d = major (nominal) diameter of external threads (bolt) in mm
d2 = pitch diameter of external threads in mm = d − 0.649519 P
d3 = minor diameter of external threads in mm = d − 1.226869 P
= thread (flank) angle

Figure 12.1. Nomenclature of ISO metric threads.

A through-bolted joint and a tapped thread joint (also termed a screw joint) are the
commonly used joint assemblies in the automotive industry. The through-bolted
joint and the tapped thread joint are abbreviated to DSV and ESV in VDI 2230,
respectively. Figures 12.2 and 12.3 depict the sections of these joints subjected to
an external axial load and their theoretical deformation (pressure) cone shapes.
Figure 12.2. Sections of a through-bolted joint and its theoretical deformation cone
shape.

Figure 12.3. Sections of a tapped thread (screw) joint and its theoretical deformation
cone shape.

The following variables are used to define these bolted joints:

DA = diameter of the interface surface of circular clamped plates

DK = diameter of the deformation cone at the interface surface of circular
clamped plates
Dkm = effective diameter of bolt head or nut-bearing area
dw = diameter of a washer head
dh = clearance hole diameter
lK = total clamping length
h = thickness of a clamped plate
D = deformation cone angle for a through-bolted (DSV) joint

E = deformation cone angle for a tapped thread (ESV) joint

z = distance from the washer (bearing) surface

dz = distance increment from the washer (bearing) surface

The induced internal forces and externally applied loads to a bolted joint are in-
troduced here. The induced bolt preload, clamp loads, balanced thread torque, and
under-head torque in a bolted joint due to an assembly tightening torque are shown
in Figure 12.4, and the applied loads to a through-bolted joint are illustrated in
Figure 12.5. The following symbols are used:

FM = bolt preload load due to MA

FA = axial force on the bolted axis
FQ = transverse force normal to the bolt axis
MA = applied assembly torque
MG = thread torque
MK = under-head torque
MB = bending moment at the bolting point
MT = torque (twist moment) at the bolt position at the interface

Figure 12.4. Induced bolt preload, clamp loads, balanced thread torque, and un-
der-head torque in a bolted joint due to an assembly tightening torque.

Figure 12.5. Applied loads to a through-bolted joint.

Some design guidelines for hex cap screws, coefficients of friction on various con-
tact surfaces, and mechanical properties are presented. The recommended clearance
hole diameter and the minimum bearing diameter of hex cap screws for a specific
ISO metric thread are shown in Tables 12.1 and 12.2.

Table 12.1. Clearance Hole Diameter (dh)

Thread Diameter Clearance Hole dh (mm)

M3 3.4
M4 4.5
M5 5.5
M6 6.6
M8 9.0
M10 11.0
M12 13.5
M14 15.5
M16 17.5
M18 20.0
M20 22.0
M22 24.0
M24 26.0
M27 30.0
M30 33.0

Source: Adapted from Marbacher (1998).

Table 12.2. Minimum Bearing Diameter (dw,min) of Hex Cap Screws

Thread Diameter Width across the Flats (mm) Bearing Diameter dw,min (mm)
M4 7 5.9
M5 8 6.9
M6 10 8.9
M8 13 11.6
M10 16 14.6
M10 17 15.9
M12 18 16.6
M12 19 17.4
M14 21 19.6
M14 22 20.5
M16 24 22.5
M18 27 25.3
M20 30 28.2
M22 32 30.0
M22 34 31.7
M24 36 33.6
M27 41 38.0
M30 46 42.7
Source: Adapted from Marbacher (1998).

Moreover, Tables 12.3 through 12.5 summarize the coefficients of friction in the
thread, in the bolt- or nut-bearing area, and between the clamp plate interfaces,
where

μG = coefficient of friction in the thread

μK = coefficient of friction in the bolt or nut-bearing area
μT = coefficient of friction between the clamp plate interfaces

Table 12.3. Coefficients of Friction in the Thread (μG)

μG External Thread (Bolt)

Steel
Black Oxide or Phos- Zinc Plated Cad. Plated Adhesive
phated
Rolled Machined Machined or Rolled
Dry Oiled MoS2 Oiled Dry Oiled Dry Oiled Dry
Inter- Steel Plain Ma- Dry 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.10 — 0.10 — 0.08 0.16
nal chined to to to to to to to
Threads (Nut) 0.18 0.16 0.12 0.16 0.18 0.14 0.25
Zinc Pl. 0.10 to — — — 0.12 to 0.10 to — — 0.14 to
0.16 0.20 0.18 0.25
Cad. Pl. 0.08 to — — — — — 0.12 to 0.12 to —
0.14 0.18 0.14
Cast Plain — 0.10 to — 0.10 to — 0.10 to — 0.08 to —
Iron 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.16
Al-Alloy Plain — 0.08 to — — — — — — —
0.20

Note: MoS2 = molybdenum disulfide (Moly-lub) lubricated.Source: Adapted from

Marbacher (1998).

Table 12.4. Coefficients of Friction in the Bolt or Nut-Bearing Area (μK)

(μK) Bolt Head

Steel
Black Oxide or Phosphated Zinc Plated Cad. Plated
Cold Headed Machined Ground Cold Headed
Dry Oiled MoS2 Oiled MoS2 Oiled Dry Oiled Dry Oiled
Mate- Steel Plain Ground
Dry — 0.16 to—
0.22 0.1 — 0.16 to0.10
0.22to—
0.18 0.08 to—
0.16
rial to
of 0.18
Joint
Members
Ma- 0.12 to 0.10 to 0.08 to 0.10 to 0.08 to — 0.10 to 0.10 to 0.08 to 0.08 to
chined 0.18 0.18 0.12 0.18 0.12 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.14
Zinc Pl. 0.10 to 0.10 to — 0.10 to — 0.10 to 0.16 to 0.10 to — —
0.16 0.16 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.18
Cad. Pl. 0.08 to 0.08 to 0.08 to 0.08 to 0.08 to 0.08 to — — 0.12 to 0.12 to
0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.20 0.14
Cast Plain Ground— 0.10 — — — 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.06 —
Iron to to to to to
0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.16
Ma- — 0.14 to — 0.10 to — 0.14 to 0.10 to 0.10 to 0.08 to —
chined 0.20 0.18 0.22 0.18 0.16 0.16
Al. Alloy — 0.08 to 0.08 to 0.08 to 0.08 to — — — — —
0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20

Note: MoS2 = molybdenum disulfide (Moly-lub) lubricated.Source: Adapted from

Marbacher (1998).

Table 12.5. Coefficient of Friction μT between the Clamp Plate Interfaces

Material Combination Static Friction Coefficient in the State

Dry Lubricated
Steel-steel/cast steel 0.1 to 0.23 0.07 to 0.12
Steel-grey cast iron 0.12 to 0.24 0.06 to 0.1
Grey cast iron-grey cast iron 0.15 to 0.3 0.2
Bronze-steel 0.12 to 0.28 0.18
Grey cast iron-bronze 0.28 0.15 to 0.2
Steel-copper alloy 0.07
Steel-aluminum alloy 0.1 to 0.28 0.05 to 0.18
Aluminum-aluminum 0.21

Source: Adapted from VDI 2230, published by Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin (2003).

Table 12.6 shows the mechanical properties for metric steel bolts, screws, and studs,
and Table 12.7 illustrates the ratio of ultimate shear strength to ultimate tensile
strength for various materials, where

RmS = ultimate tensile strength of the external threads (bolt) in N/mm2

RmM = ultimate tensile strength of the internal threads (nut) in N/mm2
RP0.2min = minimum 0.2% yield strength of the external threads in N/mm2
BM = ultimate shear strength of the internal threads in N/mm2

BS = ultimate shear strength of the external threads in N/mm2Table 12.6.

Mechanical Properties for Metric Steel Bolts, Screws, and StudsStrength Grade-
RP0.2min (N/mm2)RmS (N/mm2)4.62404004.83404205.84205208.86608309.872090010.9940-
104012.911001220Source: Adapted
from Shigley and Mischke (2001).Table 12.7-
. BM/RmM or BS/RmS Values for Various MaterialsMaterials BM/RmM or BS/R-
mSAnnealing steel0.60Austenitic (solution heat treated)0.80Austenitic F60/900.65Grey cast
iron0.90Aluminum alloys0.70Titanium alloy (age-hardened)0.60Source: Adapted from VDI
2230, published by Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin (2003).
> Read full chapter

Metallurgical Failure Analysis

Fred K. Geitner, Heinz P. Bloch, in Machinery Failure Analysis and Troubleshooting
(Fourth Edition), 2012

Failure Analysis Steps

Failure analysis of bolted joints should consist of the following essential steps:

1. Definition of failure mechanism.a.The bolt failed under static load. Did it

occur while tightening? The fracture surface will usually be at an angle other
than 90° to the bolt axis. This is because the strength of the bolt has been
exceeded by a combination of tension and torsional stress. A failure in pure
tension will usually be at a right angle to the bolt axis.b.The bolt failed in fatigue
under variable and cyclic loads. High cycle fatigue will usually be indicated
by “beach marks” on the fracture surface (see Figure 2-7). This might not be
conclusive, as the absence of these marks will not rule out a fatigue-related
failure mechanism.Figure 2-7. Fracture surface of a bolt that failed in fatigue.
The surface is smooth and shiny in those regions that failed during crack
initiation and growth (CI); it is rough in those areas where it failed rapid-
ly (RF).c.Static or fatigue failure from corrosion.d.The joint failed to perform
its design function because clamping forces fell below design requirements.
Possible failure modes are partial or total separation (displacement), joint
slippage (displacement), fretting of the joint surfaces (corrosion), and vibration
loosening (displacement) of the nut. Consequential failure mode in all these
cases is “leakage.”
2. Design review.a.The analyst will now estimate or calculate the operating loads
and possible preloads on joint components. If failure was static, he can refer
to suitable references such as the ones listed at the end of this chapter.b.If
the failure has been caused by cyclic loads, follow up work will be much more
difficult: The analyst will have to determine the endurance limit of the
parts involved in the failure. This may require experiments, as published data
are rare.
3. Special-variables check. Consider and check the factors that could contribute
to the fastener failure, as shown in Table 2-7.

> Read full chapter

Machinery Failure Analysis and Trou-

bleshooting
In Practical Machinery Management for Process Plants, 1999
Failure Analysis Steps
Failure analysis of bolted joints should consist of the following essential steps:

1. Definition of failure mechanism.a.The bolt failed under static load. Did it occur
while tightening? The fracture surface will usually be at an angle other than
90° to the bolt axis. This is because the strength of the bolt has been exceeded
by a combination of tension and torsional stress. A failure in pure tension
will usually be at a right angle to the bolt axis.b.The bolt failed in fatigue
under variable and cyclic loads. High cycle fatigue will usually be indicated
by “beach marks” on the fracture surface (see Figure 2-7). This might not be
conclusive, as the absence of these marks will not rule out a fatigue-related
failure mechanism.Figure 2-7. Fracture surface of a bolt that failed in fatigue.
The surface is smooth and shiny in those regions that failed during crack
initiation and growth (CI); it is rough in those areas where it failed rapidly
(RF).c.Static or fatigue failure from corrosion.d.The joint failed to perform
its design function because clamping forces fell below design requirements.
Possible failure modes are partial or total separation (displacement), joint
slippage (displacement), fretting of the joint surfaces (corrosion), and vibration
loosening (displacement) of the nut. Consequential failure mode in all these
cases is “leakage.”
2. Design review.a.The analyst will now estimate or calculate the operating loads
and possible preloads on joint components. If failure was static, he can refer
to suitable references such as the ones listed at the end of this chapter.b.If
the failure has been caused by cyclic loads, follow up work will be much more
difficult: The analyst will have to determine the endurance limit of the parts
involved in the failure. This may require experiments, as published data are
rare.
3. Special-variables check. Consider and check the factors that could contribute to
the fastener failure, as shown in Table 2-7.

> Read full chapter

Material-Transition Structures
Vladimir M. Shkolnikov, in Hybrid Ship Hulls, 2014

3.2.2 Bolted Joints

The conventional type of fastened (bolted) joints are usually preferred for a
heavy-duty application because of superior load-bearing capability and good pre-
dictability and controllability of the joint’s structural performance. In addition, the
methodology for the determination of design parameters of bolted joints is very well
established and minimizes possible uncertainties in the serviceability evaluation of
the hybrid joints.

Ordinary bolting represents the basic joining option being employed for the mount-
ing of composite structural components on primarily metal hulls for both major
categories of warships, surface vessels and submarines. Photographs of the bow
dome and sail cusp prepared for installation on the metal hull of a Virginia class
sub and those for mounting the metal-skirted composite topside structures of the
Zumwalt class destroyer, presented in references (see Anon, 2012, 2013; Lundquist,
2012; Tortorano, 2011), well illustrate the US Navy’s inclination to use bolted joints
for heavy-duty applications.

Meanwhile, the bolted joints are also far from an ideal joining option for a ship’s
hybrid hull application. The holes drilled within a composite part to insert the bolts
are allied with multiple cuttings of the fiber material—the primary load-bearing
element of FRPs. This substantially impairs the composite part, not just because
of interrupting fiber continuity but also by creating multiple origins for stress
concentration, which is especially significant for the relatively big holes required
for the heavy-duty applications. To compensate for this, both the thickness of the
composite part and the sizing of the bolts have to be substantially increased. As a
result, the weight of bolted joints increases, and their structural efficiency declines.

It should also be noted that the achievable strength of a bolted joint under quasi-sta-
tic loading is substantially higher than that of a plain adhesive bond; whereas the
long-term fatigue strength related to normal ship operation loading of these two
options is comparable.

Although achievable ultimate strength of bolted joints under quasi-static loading is

substantially higher than that of plain adhesive bond, the long-term fatigue strength
related to normal ship operation loading is comparable for these two joining options.

As a matter of fact, the fatigue performance is typically the main criterion for
selection of a preferred hybrid joint option, as a specific military-origin impact/shock
loading is not the dominant operational load case.

One more significant negative factor applying to bolted joints is problematic water
sealing and associated intense (crevice) corrosion of the bolts and adjacent metal
details. This also hampers utilization of ordinary bolted joints for naval platforms.

Ultimately, an application of the disproportionately heavy, bulky, and costly com-

posite-metal assemblage utilizing a bolted joint may result in noticeable cutback of
the anticipated functional advantages of PMC utilization for primarily metal vessels.
Per Brown’s (2004) estimation, the weight impact of the bolted joints employed for
Zumwalt class destroyers was quite significant, at 162 kg/m of the composite-metal
seam extent.

The compromised weight benefits of the PMC application, excessive labor opera-
tions, related high manufacturing cost, and problematic water-sealing associated
with mere bolting are probably primary reasons for the US Navy’s decision to reject
the potentially advantageous composite option of the deckhouse structure for the
Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG 1002), the third and last unit of the stealthy Zumwalt class
of destroyer, switching to a less costly steel deckhouse alternative (Cavas, 2013a,b).
Conceivably, this changeover will notably downgrade the stealth performance of that
vessel.

> Read full chapter

Design and failure analysis of compos-

ite bolted joints for aerospace compos-
ites
C.T. McCarthy, M.A. McCarthy, in Polymer Composites in the Aerospace Industry,
2015

11.6 Future trends

A future trend in composite bolted joint design is the use of more advanced contin-
uum damage mechanics approaches to model joint failure, so that non-linear shear
behaviour and gradual stiffness degradation can be implemented. An important
element of joint failure is delamination, and many efforts are being undertaken
to implement delamination in finite element models. However, for bolted joints
analysis this poses many problems due to the large number of delamination inter-
faces in thick laminates, coupled with the fact that delamination normally occurs
at the bolt-hole where significant contact mechanics are also at play. This makes
modelling very challenging, since newly formed delamination surfaces can poten-
tially become new contact surfaces as the joint deforms during failure. In addition,
mitigating mesh-sensitivity effects in damage modelling is a significant current
and future challenge. It needs to be proved that any numerical predictions of joint
strength are independent of the underlying mesh used for the analysis. A number of
approaches exist for mitigating mesh-sensitivity effects, such as crack-band models,
non-local approaches and damage delay procedures, but as yet, no one technique
has been shown to be the most suitable approach for bolted joints analysis.
Another approach that is receiving considerable attention recently is multi-scale,
multi-level joint analysis. In this approach, a global model is used to model the
entire structure, where the fastener region is modelled approximately. Using this
global model as a driver, a local model of the joint is constructed where many details
are included such as the bolt, washer, composite material, contact and friction,
and material damage in both the fastener and surrounding composite. However,
efficient approaches are still needed to provide a methodology to facilitate feedback
from the local model to the global model, so that more accurate global predictions
of the structural response to load would be possible.

Joints represent the ‘weak-link’ in any structure and are, in most cases, the location
where structural failure initiates. For safety critical structures, such as primary
load-bearing joints in aircraft, it would be highly advantageous to be able to monitor
the health of joints in real time throughout their design life. In the aerospace sector,
the demand to maintain airworthiness by performing regular inspections becomes
clear when realising that the design life of, say, a typical short-range jet aircraft is
approximately 50,000 flights. This example illustrates the extensive loading history,
which the structure, with special emphasis on its joints, has to withstand during
its operational life, including many accidentally induced damages and cracks. The
recently introduced Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) concept is aimed towards
real-time structural airworthiness assessment as an alternative to traditional sched-
uled maintenance inspections. Applying this concept to structural joints will enable
structural airworthiness deterioration to be monitored in real-time, significantl-
y reducing maintenance costs by increasing the present scheduled maintenance
intervals. Furthermore, it is also expected that by adopting the SHM concept,
new aircraft design will require less access panels to gain access for inspections,
especially in the wing, further significantly increasing the structural efficiency. For
secondary, non-critical joints, it would also be advantageous to be able to check joint
health during routine inspections. Hence, joint health monitoring tools are urgently
required, and so research in this area is due to receive a considerable amount of
attention in the near future.

Finally, and as stated previously, approximately half of an aircraft's parts are fasteners.
There is an enormous drive in the industry to reduce fastener requirements, and so
novel joining approaches will form a significant base for future research. However,
bolting will probably never be fully replaced, so novel approaches to optimise bolt
patterns to both reduce the number of bolts and increase the strength of the joint
still remains a major challenge.

> Read full chapter

Damage and Failure of Aerospace Com-
posites
Victor Giurgiutiu, in Structural Health Monitoring of Aerospace Composites, 2016

5.9.1 Fastener Hole Damage in Composites

Mechanical fasteners used in riveted and bolted joints are prevalent in metallic
aircraft structures, where they offer a rapid and convenient method of assembling
large structures from smaller components. The load-bearing mechanisms of metal-
lic joints are well understood and easily predicted. The use of mechanical fasters
in composite structures is also allowed, but this comes with significant strength
and fatigue penalties. Nonetheless, mechanical fasteners are still widely used in the
construction of composite and/or hybrid structures, especially when load transfer
has to be achieved between composite and metallic components.

A typical example is illustrated in Figure 28a, where the load from a composite wing
skin is transferred into an aluminum metallic bracket through a 9-bolt junction.
When in service, each hole in the composite skin would be subjected to tension
and/or compression loading that may, under certain circumstances, promote dam-
age initiation and damage progression.
Figure 28. Composite damage due to fastener holes: (a) typical bolted junction
between a composite wing skin and metallic connection; (b) tension failure modes;
compression failure modes.

Under tension (Figure 28b), the composite joint may fail in three major modes:
(i) tear failure; (ii) bearing failure; and (iii) shear-out failure. Of these, the tear
failure is unlikely to happen because the fiber reinforcement is strongest in tension.
The shear-out failure would happen if the fibers are predominant in the tension
direction; shear-out failure can be counteracted through design by the addition of
45° reinforcement. The bearing failure is more difficult to prevent because it is a
compression-type loading that has to be taken up by the polymeric matrix and by
the fibers under compression. Bearing failure may occur through matrix crushing,
or fiber microbuckling, or both.

Under compression (Figure 28c), the composite joint may fail in three major modes:
(i) overall buckling of the component; (ii) local buckling of the region weakened by
the hole; (iii) fiber microbuckling at the areas of highest compression strength. The
overall compression buckling can be prevented by proper component design. Local
buckling and fiber microbuckling may also be prevented by design, but damage
accumulation during cyclic loading would eventually weaken it.

The use of mechanical fasteners in fiber composites is somehow counterintuitive,

but expedient. The very premise of fiber composites is to have the load carried
through the high-strength fibers embedded in a relatively weak polymeric matrix.
This type of load-carrying capability benefits from a smooth and continuous load
“flow” and is adverse to sudden changes in material properties and geometries
such as those imposed by a fastener hole. Ideally, composite joints should be done
through adhesive bonding with gradual transition from one component into the
next. However, mechanical fasteners are often used for a variety of reasons and one
has to assess the consequences of such a design decision: fasteners holes drilled in
the composite structures produce sudden discontinuities, interrupt the fiber flow,
and act as stress concentrators. They also act as crack and delamination initiators due
to microdamage introduced during the hole drilling process. Special attention can
be given to creating stress-free holes by designing local reinforcement; damage-free
holes can also be manufactured with special tooling. However, these aspects come
with added cost and may not be always implementable in practice.

> Read full chapter

Nondestructive testing of damage in

aerospace composites
R.H. Bossi, V. Giurgiutiu, in Polymer Composites in the Aerospace Industry, 2015

15.2.3 Fastener hole damage in composites

Mechanical fasteners used in riveted and bolted joints are prevalent in metallic
aircraft structures where they offer a rapid and convenient method of assembling
large structures from smaller components. The load-bearing mechanisms of metal-
lic joints are well understood and easily predicted. The use of mechanical fasteners
in composite structures is also allowed, but this comes with significant strength
and fatigue penalties. Nonetheless, mechanical fasteners are still widely used in
the construction of current composite structures, especially when load transfer has
to be achieved between composite and metallic components. A typical example is
illustrated in Figure 15.3(a), where the load from a composite wing skin is transferred
into an aluminum metallic bracket through a 9-bolt junction. When in service,
each hole in the composite skin would be subjected to tension and/or compression
loading that may, under certain circumstances, promote damage initiation and
damage progression [7].

Figure 15.3. Composite damage due to fastener holes.(a) Typical bolted junction

between a composite wing skin and metallic connection; (b) failure modes in a bolted
joint under tension [6]; and (c) compressive failure modes in a plate with an open
hole.

Under tension (Figure 15.3(b)), the composite joint may fail in one of three major
modes: (1) tear failure, (2) bearing failure, and (3) shear-out failure. Of these, the
tear failure is unlikely to happen because the fiber reinforcement is strongest in
tension. The shear-out failure would happen if the fibers are predominant in the
tension direction; shear-out failure can be counteracted through material design
by the addition of a 45° reinforcement. The bearing failure is more difficult to
prevent because it is a compression-type loading that has to be taken up by the
polymeric matrix and by the fibers under compression. Bearing failure may occur
through matrix crushing, fiber microbuckling, or both.

Under compression (Figure 15.3(c)), the composite joint may fail in three major
modes: overall buckling of the component, local buckling of the region weakened by
the hole, and fiber microbuckling at the areas of highest compression strength. The
overall compression buckling can be prevented by proper component design. Local
buckling and fiber microbuckling may be also prevented by design, but damage
accumulation during cyclic loading would eventually weaken it.

The use of mechanical fasteners in fiber composites is somehow counterintuitive,

but expedient. The very premise of fiber composites assumes the load to be carried
through the high-strength fibers embedded in a relatively weak polymeric matrix.
This type of load-carrying capability benefits from a smooth and continuous load
“flow” and is adverse to sudden changes in material properties and geometries
such as those imposed by a fastener hole. Ideally, composite joints should be done
through adhesive bonding with gradual transition from one component into the
next. However, mechanical fasteners are often used for a variety of reasons, and one
has to assess the consequences of such a design decision: fastener holes drilled in
the composite structures produce sudden discontinuities, interrupt the fiber flow,
and act as stress concentrators. They also act as crack and delamination initiators due
to microdamage introduced during the hole-drilling process. Special attention can
be given to creating stress-free holes by designing local reinforcement; damage-free
holes can be also manufactured with special tooling. However, these aspects come
with added cost and may not be always implemented in practice.

> Read full chapter

Repair of damaged aerospace compos-

ite structures
E. Archer, A. McIlhagger, in Polymer Composites in the Aerospace Industry, 2015

14.5.1 Analysis of bolted repair

Analysis of a bolted repair follows the analysis of a bolted joint. The behaviour
of composites in bolted joints differs considerably from what occurs with metals.
The brittle nature of composites necessitates more detailed analysis to quantify the
level of various stress peaks as stress concentrations. Composite joint design is
more sensitive to edge distances and hole spacing than metal joint designs and
requires specialised fasteners. Interference fit fasteners or rivets must not be used
but expanding sleeves can be installed as required.

The estimation of the transferred load through the repair is the first stage in the re-
pair analysis. Generally the load cases must be sought from the aircraft manufacturer
but in special occasions, especially for temporary repairs, loads can be approximated
by reverse engineering, utilising the known design of the parent structure. Care
should be taken to use conservative approximations that are based on the maximum
 load that can be sustained by the geometry and layup of the parent structure.
After the load transferred through the repair is known, the distribution of this load
between the various fasteners, parent structure and the patch has to be evaluated.

A failure analysis should also be conducted as the parent part of the joint may not
be adequate to accommodate the mechanically fastened joint. It may not have the
adequate thickness or the proper layup to provide the bearing resistance. As the
layup cannot be changed, the only recourse is to bond additional plies. However,
care must be taken so as not to end up with a highly unsymmetrical layup. Care
must also be taken to properly estimate the bearing/by pass ratio and to consider
all possible laminate failure in order to avoid increasing the damage by failing the
periphery of the repair. Analysis techniques follow Volume 3, Sections 6.2.2.2 and
6.3.2.3 of the MIL-HDBK-17.

Other important variables are patch structure (composite material, layup and thick-
ness according to the analytical results) and fastener stiffness which should be
determined by test or analysis and subsequently used in the analysis of the overall
repair. Fastener tensile and shear stresses should be determined as to their adequacy
for static strength and for fatigue loading. Fastener selection is addressed in Chapter
11.

> Read full chapter

ScienceDirect is Elsevier’s leading information solution for researchers.

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. or its licensors or contributors. ScienceDirect ® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V. Terms and conditions apply.