Lug structure is an important connection structure in aviation aircraft. However, fatigue cracks are easily generated during the service of the aircraft. Therefore, this study aims to explore the influence of different structural parameters on the fatigue life of the 7075-T651 aluminum alloy lug, using experimental and numerical methods to determine the effects of these structural parameters. Scanning electron microscopy was employed for fracture analysis, and three-dimensional finite element models were used to solve the holes edge stress distributions under peak load and stress concentration factor. The results indicate that the fatigue life of the lug increases with the increase in the extrusion projection area and the included angle of the outer edge, and the impact of the extrusion projection area on the fatigue life of the lug is greater than the angle of the outer edge, and the fatigue life of the lug does not change with the change of the chamfer at the bottom. The peak stress at the root of the lug hole becomes the main factor affecting the fatigue life of the lug, and the crack always expands along the net cross-section of each parameter lug.
SolobAGrbovićABožićŽ, et al.XFEM based analysis of fatigue crack growth in damaged wing-fuselage attachment lug. Eng Fail Anal2020; 112: 104516. DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2020.104516.
2.
NiuCY. Practical Aircraft Structural Stress Analysis and Dimensional Design. Beijing: Aeronautical Industry Press, 2009, pp. 283–284.
3.
BoljanovićSMaksimovićS. Fatigue crack growth modeling of attachment lugs. Int J Fatigue2014; 58: 66–74. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2013.03.016.
4.
LarssonSE. The development of a calculation method for the fatigue strength of lugs and a study of test results for lugs of aluminimum. Fatigue Des Procedures1969; 10: 309–342. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-08-011697-6.50017-5.
MikheevskiySGlinkaGAlgeraD. Analysis of fatigue crack growth in an attachment lug based on the weight function technique and the Unigrow fatigue crack growth model. Int J Fatigue2012; 42: 88–94. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2011.07.006.
7.
NaderiMIyyerN. Fatigue life prediction of cracked attachment lugs using XFEM. Int J Fatigue2015; 77: 186–193. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2015.02.021.
8.
BahloulABouraouiCHBoukharoubaT. Prediction of fatigue life by crack growth analysis. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2017; 91: 4009–4017. DOI: 10.1007/s00170-017-0069-8.
9.
BarterSSharpPKClarkG. The failure of an F/A-18 trailing edge flap hinge. Eng Fail Anal1994; 1: 255–266. DOI: 10.1016/1350-6307(94)90001-9.
10.
RigbyRAliabadiMH. Stress intensity factors for cracks at attachment lugs. Eng Fail Anal1997; 4: 133–146. DOI: 10.1016/s1350-6307(97)00004-6.
11.
AzevedoCRHippertESperaG, et al.Aircraft landing gear failure: fracture of the outer cylinder lug. Eng Fail Anal2002; 9: 1–15. DOI: 10.1016/s1350-6307(00)00039-x.
12.
AllegrucciLAmuraMBagnoliF, et al.Fatigue fracture of a aircraft canopy lever reverse. Eng Fail Anal2009; 16: 391–401. DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2008.05.010.
GrantRJSmartJStanleyP. A parametric study of the elastic stress distribution in pin-loaded lugs. J Strain Anal1994; 29: 299–307. DOI: 10.1243/03093247V294299.
15.
ShridharKSureshBSKumarMM. Fatigue analysis of wing-fuselage lug section of a transport aircraft. Procedia Structural Integrity2019; 14: 375–383. DOI: 10.1016/j.prostr.2019.05.046.
16.
LiYBDongDKGongYZ. Equivalent load method for analysis of ear fatigue life under oblique load. Mech Strength2017; 39(03): 719–722.
17.
SobotkaJCLeeY-DMcClungRC, et al.Stress-intensity factor solutions for tapered lugs with oblique pin loads. In: Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. New York, NY: Springer. 2019: pp. 503–517. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-21503-3_40.
18.
MookaiyaKBalajiSBalakrishanSR. Crack growth analysis in aircraft wing lug section and fatigue life estimation. Int J Eng Res Technol2013; 2: 2018–2023.
WitekL. Failure analysis of the wing-fuselage connector of an agricultural aircraft. Eng Fail Anal2006; 13: 572–581. DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2004.12.029.
21.
SumanthMHAyyappaT. Comparative analysis of aircraft wing fuselage lug attachment bracket. Int J Technol Res Eng2018; 5: 4422–4429.
22.
AntoniNGaisneF. Analytical modelling for static stress analysis of pin-loaded lugs with bush fitting. Applied Mathematical Modelling2011; 35(1): 1–21.
23.
WuLMHeYT. Effect of lug thickness on stress concentration coefficient under axial tensile load. Aerospace Precision Manufacturing Technology2009; 45(5): 77–80.
24.
YangZJWuLMWuW, et al, Fatigue crack propagation behavior of alloy lug with different structure 7050-t7451. Mech Engineering Materials2016; 40(10): 89–93.
25.
BrownMAEvansJL. Fatigue life variability due to variations in interference fit of steel bushings in 7075-T651 aluminum lugs. Int J Fatigue2014; 44: 177–187. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2012.05.001.
26.
RansomJPoastTReizekE, et al.Fatigue strength improvement of helicopter lugs with the forcemate process: analytical prediction versus test results. In: Annual Forum Proceedings, American Helicopter Society, Quebec, Canada, 29 April–1 May 2008, p. 2147.
27.
BahloulAAhmedABBouraouiC. Probabilistic fatigue crack growth assessment of Al 7075-T6 aerospace component. Procedia Structural Integrity2017; 5: 430–437. DOI: 10.1016/j.prostr.2017.07.192.
28.
LiRXChenWJFuGY, et al.Numerical simulation of flattening and wrapping process of lenticular wrapped-rib. J Astronautics2011; 32(1): 224–231.
29.
De MatosPFPMoreiraPMGPCamanhoPP, et al.Numerical simulation of cold working of rivet holes. Finite Elem Anal Des2005; 41: 989–1007. DOI: 10.1016/j.finel.2005.01.001.
30.
Huersch. Fatigue of materials. Beijing: National Defense Industry Press, 1993, pp. 1–2.
31.
NiuCY. Structural engineering design of practical aircraft. Beijing: Aviation Industry Press, 2008, p. 248.
32.
YuanXYueZFWenSF, et al.Numerical and experimental investigation of the cold expansion process with split sleeve in titanium alloy TC4. Int J Fatigue2015; 77: 78–85. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2015.03.014.
