Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 15
Nonlinear Strength and Stability Analysis of a Landing Gear Component Andrew Mera ‘The Boeing Co. Information, Space and Defense Systems Group Seattle, WA Abstract The reserve strength of an aircraft landing gear beam is evaluated, using an MSC/NASTRAN finite element model. The load is incremented until positive margins of safety can be demonstrated for the various design criteria considered. Differences in simulated behavior are identified when the model formulation includes initial stress stiffening, geometric and material nonlinearity, and instability. The sensitivity of the results is investigated to variations in end restraints and to geometric imperfections. 1.0 Introduction: Structural Problem to be Solved An aircraft main landing gear is shown in Fig. 1. Gear support structure is designed by a wide variety of loading conditions; here a representative fore-aft loading is applied to the main landing gear beam through the trunnion and side brace. ‘The die-forged and machined aluminum component of interest, isolated in Fig. 2, is a thin-walled L-beam, except for locally solid behavior near the support lugs. The variable thickness webs and flanges are sized to cary the shear and bending moment. Torsional restraint is provided by two stabilizer braces. Local stability in the web and flanges is aided by stiffeners. Warping restraint on the slender, open beam section is provided by solid end lugs. Loading is applied by the landing gear, distributed by the solid material build-up around the trunnion, and resisted at the end lugs. ‘The structure and the loading have a vertical plane of near-symmetry; this is disturbed somewhat by a few ‘one-sided stiffeners, by a small lateral load, by the inboard support not being quite in the web plane, and finally by possible manufacturing eccentricities (bow or twist) in the beam Traditional techniques of linear static analysis and panel local buckling conclude that the material elastic limit would be exceeded for this newly identified load case. The objective of this work is to include geometric and material nonlinear effects into the strength evaluation, A local model was isolated, with various boundary conditions extracted from the global linear model; a stress-strain law is shown in Fig. 3: it has an elastic portion, followed by linear strain hardening. A partial list of governing design criteria includes: * limit toad upper bound: —S6ksi $ o <5Oksi in uniaxial tension or compr: combined stress: 6, S 6Iksi tensidn, 63ksi compression + ultimate toad carrying capacity: 6, S 72ksi + deep, slender sections are often governed by stability: local buckling in compressive regions of webs or flanges is allowed, but the critical load should stay below the global lateral-torsional buckling level + the combined criteria can be gathered into a strength envelope: the main landing gear beam must sustain a load level of 14% higher than the minimum fuse pin strength The following analysis results were of interest: + ultimate strength margins of safety for the various design criter + deformed shapes and load history curves + stresses at critical locations: deep webs, flanges; identify regions of high compressive sttess for stability evaluation ‘+ reaction forces at supports, to be compared against a global analys considered ‘The geometric model was created in CATIA [8]; the finite element meshing, analysis, and results review were done in MSC/PATRAN [7] and MSC/NASTRAN [6] 2.0 Structural Idealizations, Analysis Formulations Given the solid CATIA model and automatic finite element meshers, the analyst could generate a detailed solid mesh of some 140,000 d.o-f’s. Such a “brute force” temptation was avoided, since the model size ‘would be prohibitive for nonlinear and stability analysis. Instead one can trade engineering time and tailor the problem size to the level of accuracy and reliability required. The various formulations discussed below lead to significant differences in behavior and results, 2.1. finite element model Plate elements have bilinear displacement functions for membrane behavior, bicubic for out-of-plane bending, with a correction for the transverse shear flexibility (Reissner-Mindlin theory). The inplane rotational stiffness is singular, but it can be tied to inplane translational stiffnesses. The plate natural field variable is a stress resultant; since yield criteria are based on invariants of the stress tensor, one ‘examines membrane stresses, bending stress and combined stresses at the extreme fiber. ‘The mesh selection for linear statics ignores the stress singularities at the points of load application. Convergence of the buckling eigenvalue with mesh density is shown in Fig. 4, requiring eight linear elements per anticipated wave length. As the aspect ratio of a flange panel increases, the lowest energy buckling mode becomes one with several ripples. Plate inelastic formulation: through-the-thickness plasticity is neglected, only membrane and bending effects are included; the calculations are lumped at five layers of Gauss integration points. Boundary conditions: the end lugs and the trunnion interface are assumed to be relatively rigid; the end restraints can be represented by a boundary stiffness matrix, extracted from the global model. 2.2 linear stress analysis Linearity means small displacements, small rotations, small strains, and elastic material. The basic relations in an elastic continuum can be formulated as a differential equation of local equilibrium in the domain and on the boundary, such as EVs = p for membranes, and wiv =q — forbending (1) 12(1-v") An alternate formulation method uses the principle of virtual work, or the variational minimum of the global energy potential 9.1, = Sfe"odd+ fi"udP and’). at equilibrium 31, = 0 Q) ‘The minimum-energy statement of eqn.(2)b, when specialized to plate bending, is equivalent to the equilibrium statement of eqn.(1). After finite element discretization eqn.(2)b becomes a matrix algebraic equation in a finite dimensional domain [K]{u} = {P} 8) plus boundary conditions on displacement or stress; K is the stiffness matrix relating the vector of nodal displacements u to the vector of work-equivalent applied nodal loads P. PI 4 2.3 stress stiffening, bifurcation buckling In the Taylor expansion of the global energy potential [I about an equilibrium state one can include, beyond just linear terms, an effect called initial stress-stffening or load-stiffening; for example @ ‘membrane in tension 6, will resist lateral motion due an additional strain energy term in eqn.(2)a: 81, = BIT, + f8e"o,d0 (4) This formulation assumes small displacements and small strains; the applied loads are assumed to remain attached to the grid points and maintain their original direction. In the finite element formulation a linearized differential stiffness K4 (linear function of displacements) is calculated from the initial stress field and eqn.(4)b becomes [K+KI{u} = (P} 6) 3 Compressive differential stiffness sofiens this structure; with increasing load the stability of equilibrium may show a bifurcation, the total potential function reaches a neutrally stable state 8°TI, = 0; a buckled shape becomes an altemate solution. Mathematically the matrix in eqn.(5) becomes singular; if we represent a perturbation from a still stable equilibrium as a factor Aon a Toad level P;, the finite element formulation becomes an eigenvalue problem: [K+AK{]{@} = {0} © We are looking for load factors 2. which render the coefficient matrix singular; the corresponding ® represents buckled mode shapes, while the critical load is given by: Por = MminP a ‘The possible mode shapes for this structure are global lateral-torsional, or local compression buckling in the web or flanges. 2.4 stress analysis with nonlinear material ‘The next level of generalization is to consider the material law to be nonlinear elastic: {o} = [Dle)l{e} (8) where the stress-strain law D(€) is defined by the curve in Fig. 3: different proportional limits Gy in tension and compression, and a strain hardening range. The strain energy term in eqn.(2)a is no longer a simple quadratic function of strain. The von Mises initial yield criterion in a combined state of stress expresses a limit on the distortion energy in terms of deviatoric stress components: vm 5106, 2) + (6p G3) +(G3-H4)'] < oy ° No criteria are considered at this time for continued yielding and plasticity to failure. At the structural level, eqn.(3) becomes a nonlinear matrix algebraic equation: [K(u)]{u} = {P} (10) One reformulates the solution as an iterative residual minimization process in terms of a parameter i; substitution of a trial displacement veetor u can be written as: {P(u, i} = {F(u, i)} + {AF} ay where the first term is the vector of external applied loads, the second is due to the element internal forces [K(u)]{w} , the third term is a residual load imbalance. The Jacobian K(u) = AF/Au, ot local tangent stiffness, must be invertible. Newton-Raphson iterations start with an initial stiffness and load, solve for the displacement u, recalculate a current tangent stiffness K“(u,i), continue until ‘some scalar norm of the residual |AF||/|Fl] becomes negligible within a preset tolerance (the relative norm could be defined on displacement, force, or on strain energy); the convergence rate is quadratic, Variations of the method trade iterations off against periodic stiffness matrix updates. 2.5 combined nonlinear geometry and nonlinear material The model requires both stress softening and nonlinear elastic material. A force-displacement relation is shown in Fig. 5 for a structure without imperfections. The transition points between regimes is of particular interest: beyond the proportional limit a softening range is seen; an elastic- perfectly plastic material may lead to a limit load P,; an instability may occur at load level P,: upon -4

Вам также может понравиться