Fastener Joint Modeling for Fatigue Cracking Prevention
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing modeling solutions for joints with fasteners are either manual or of low fidelity, failing to accurately capture three-dimensional contact interactions and prevent costly cracking during full-scale fatigue tests.
Innovation Solution
A method and system for modeling joints with fasteners that involves receiving input parameters, calculating second-level parameters, building component models, subtracting fastener bores, generating an assembly model, applying boundary conditions and loads, and generating an input file suitable for finite element analysis.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of manufacture
If manual modeling methods are used, then flexibility in model building is maintained, but modeling time increases and productivity decreases
Solution Approach 1:
The system enables automated self-modeling of joint assemblies by automatically generating component models, fastener models, and assembly models from input parameters without requiring manual intervention for each modeling step
Solution Approach 2:
The system uses parameter-driven modeling where changing input parameters automatically updates the entire model including geometry, material properties, boundary conditions, and analysis settings, allowing rapid exploration of design variations
2Device complexity
If low fidelity modeling is used, then modeling complexity is reduced, but stress prediction accuracy deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the joint assembly into distinct component models and fastener models that can be independently defined and assembled, allowing detailed representation of complex three-dimensional contact interactions while maintaining organized model structure
Solution Approach 2:
The system transitions from two-dimensional simplifications to three-dimensional modeling, capturing the full spatial complexity of fastener-structure contact interactions and enabling accurate stress predictions at fastener locations
3Reliability
If designs are changed during certification testing, then cracking problems can be addressed, but program time and costs increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary virtual testing and stress analysis before physical certification tests, identifying potential cracking issues and optimizing designs in advance to prevent problems during actual testing
Solution Approach 2:
The system uses finite element analysis results to provide feedback on stress concentrations and potential failure points, enabling iterative design optimization that prevents cracking issues before they manifest in physical testing
Data Source
AI summary
A method for modeling joints with fasteners includes receiving multiple input parameters of multiple components connectable with one or more fasteners; calculating multiple second level parameters with a computer based on the input parameters; building multiple component models of the components absent the one or more fasteners based on the second level parameters; subtracting multiple bolt bores from the component models; and generating an assembly model by combining the component models with one or more fastener models of the one or more fasteners in the bolt bores. The method further includes applying multiple boundary conditions to the assembly model; applying multiple loads to the assembly model under the boundary conditions to generate multiple analysis key words; and generating an input file based on the analysis key words. The input file is suitable for a finite element analysis.