PSI - Issue 39

Hithendra Karakampalle et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 39 (2022) 711–721 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2021) 000–000

714

4

Fig. 4. Case 3: Combination of cracks at locations L1, L2 and L3.

2.1. Geometry and Material A finite width plate of dimensions 60 mm (h) x 60 mm (w) x 3 mm (t ) was considered with 6 x φ5 mm holes with rivets/pins arranged in lozenge pattern, as shown in Fig. 5. Both the pitch and the back pitch of rivets are spaced at a distance of ‘3d’. Joints are in 3-2-1 Lozenge pattern, with joints L1-L2-L3 in one row 1, L4-L5 in the second row and L6 is placed in the third row. Pins of diameter (D) which are sized to have different interference levels –0%, 0.1%, 0.15%, 0.2% and 0.3% are inserted in a river hole of fixed diameter of 5 mm, as shown in Table 1.

Fig. 5. Geometrical arrangement of Plate and rivets.

Table 1. Interference considered between the joint

Interference Hole Diameter Pin Diameter Radial Interference value I % d, mm D, mm Mm 0 5 5.0000 0.00000 0.1 5 5.0050 0.00250 0.15 5 5.0075 0.00375 0.2 5 5.0100 0.00500 0.3 5 5.0150 0.00750

The plate and the pin are considered to be made out of mild steel, with Elastic Modulus (E) of 200 GPa, Poisson’s ratio (ν) of 0.3, tensile yield strength (σ y ) of 250 MPa and ultimate strength (σ u ) of 450 MPa. Table 2 shows the geometry of cracks used for the three analysis cases. For the first part of the study, the simulations started with absence of crack, then, starting with an initial crack length of 7 mm, it is extended up to a