Spectrum Loading and Surface Finish Effects in AL7075-T73

Michael R. Urban
Sikorsky Aircraft
M/S S317A
6900 main Street
P.O. Box 9729
Stratford, CT 06615-9129
Phone: 203.386.7159 E-Fax: 860.998.5852 E-mail murban@sikorsky.com

Abstract

Spectrum load tests were preformed to investigate the effects of flaws, surface finish, and load interaction in
AL7075-T73 aluminum. Testing was conducted on polished, 80-rms as-machined, and corroded 7075-T73
aluminum specimens. The project builds on crack growth models previously developed from constant
amplitude test to evaluate the effects of load interaction on crack growth predictions of spectrum fatigue
lives. Spectra used were reduced main rotor blade spectra versions of a Sikorsky main rotor blade and
HELIX spectra. Both spectra have the majority of their cycles at an R-value of about 0.4. Testing results were
reviewed using fracture mechanics and Palmgren-miner analyzes. It was concluded that a fracture
mechanics approach using the NASGRO v3.0 code correlated with testing better than an S-N Palgmgren-
Miner analysis.

Introduction

Experiences with existing helicopter cracking and
fractures indicate that, as with fixed wing aircraft,
the majority of fatigue issues are not with safe life
replacement times but with damage tolerance
considerations. Few if any helicopter fatigue
concerns can be attributed to the replacement times
derived from safe life evaluation. Accidents are
attributable to defects, corrosion, maintenance error,
unanticipated loads, etc. These are all damage
tolerance issues. As a result of these observations
the FAA has changed its fatigue regulatory
requirements and is actively reviewing these
requirements with the industry and the Technical
Oversight Group on Aging Aircraft (TOGAA).
Sikorsky Aircraft in partnership with the National
Rotorcraft Technology Center (NRTC) initiated an
investigation into Damage Tolerance for Helicopter
Structures in 1995. The objective was to develop
the technology for the transition from safe-life to
damage tolerant design, certification, and
management of helicopter structure.
This project included analysis with the NASGRO
and FASTRAN crack growth codes, constant
amplitude fatigue and crack growth testing of
common
Presented at the American Helicopter Society 65th
Annual Forum, Grapevine Texas, May 27-29, 2009.
Copyright © 2009 by the American Helicopter
Society International, Inc. All rights reserved.
helicopter materials with various surface conditions
the development of crack growth models to
determine component replacement times and
inspection intervals, and comparison of full-scale
fatigue and crack growth data for several rotor parts.
This project was presented to the FAA Rotorcraft
Directorate and the TOGGA, and supports evolving
FAA recommendations to industry.
A Crack Growth Spectrum Load project was
performed as part of this project, at the suggestion
of a government NRTC reviewer, to provide
spectrum fatigue test data for specimens with
various surface conditions for comparison with crack
growth model predictions.
The project builds on crack growth models
previously developed from constant amplitude test
to evaluate the effects of load interaction on crack
growth predictions of spectrum fatigue lives.
Spectrum load tests were preformed to investigate
the effects of flaws, surface finish, and load
interaction in AL7075-T73 aluminum. NASGRO v3.0
and crack growth models developed from constant
amplitude fatigue and crack growth test were used
for the fracture mechanics evaluation of the
spectrum load test results.
Two reduced main rotor blade spectra were used in
the testing to evaluate load interaction effects. Both
spectra have the majority of their cycles at an R-
value of about 0.4. One of the spectrum was derived
from the standard Helix spectrum and the other is
based on Sikorsky flight data.
Four different surface conditions were evaluated.
These included a highly polished surface, which
was used as a baseline for the material, an 80 rms
machined surface, and corrosion pits with depths of
.005 and .040 inches. The corrosion pits were
considered representative of barely visual and
clearly visual defects respectively
Material and Surface Conditions
Test Specimen Geometry
The unnotched polished test specimen was a 3.9
inch long round bar axial load specimen per ASTM
E466 with a gage diameter of 0.25 inches. The
round bar specimen geometry is shown in Figure 1.
The specimen in Figure 1 is shown with threaded
grip areas, but the specimens used in the spectrum
load tests had smooth grip areas, which were held
in the test machines using hydraulic grip V-wedges.
The as-machined and corrosion pit test specimens
were 9 inch long dog-bone axial load specimens
with a 1.0 inch long gage section of 0.5 inch by 0.25
inch cross section. The dog-bone specimen is
shown in Figure 2.

All specimens were machined from aluminum 7075

alloy 3 inch thick by 6 inch wide forged bars which
had been obtained in an overaged -T7351 heat treat
condition per specification QQ-A-225/9. The alloy
composition of the material was found to be
acceptable by chemical spectrography. The
mechanical properties were typical for this alloy and
heat treatment. Specimens were cut from the bars
such that the specimen axes were parallel to the
rolling direction. The test specimens were thus
aligned with the material L-T direction.

Polished constant amplitude tests were used as the

baseline condition. This data was used to develop
the baseline crack growth closure model in the
NASGRO 3.0 code [1]. This baseline crack growth
model consisted of the crack growth rate “curve”
(da/dN vs. K), threshold stress intensity ( Kth),
relationship of the threshold stress intensity with
stress ratio (R), and the “equivalent initial flaw size”
(EIFS). The EIFS for the polished specimens was
considered as the material flaw EIFS. An 80-rms
surface condition was selected as an as-machined
condition.

Corrosion damage was selected based on test Figure 1. Unnotched Round Bar Specimen
results of numerous flaw types that were evaluated
under the earlier constant amplitude testing. Of the
flaws reviewed corrosion pits tended to have the
most severe effect on fatigue in Al7075-T73, and
therefore these flaws were selected for the
spectrum load tests.
 Table 1 Spectrum Load Test Matrix
2.000
± 0.005 Surface Load Reduced Reduced
1.000
Condition level HELIX32 Spec. UH-60 Spec.
± 0.005
2.000 ± 0.005
Max Stress Max Stress
2PL (ksi) (ksi)
High 50 50
Elliptical Shoulder Polished Mid 42 38
4PL
Low 30, 36 32
High 50 50
9.000 1.000 Straight-Sided
± 0.020 A A ± 0.005 Gage Section 80 rms Mid 38 35
Low 30 20
2.000 ± 0.010
2PL 4.50
High 38 50
± 0.25 .005 pit Mid 30 32
Low 20, 25 25
High 30 40, 45
1.000 V
± 0.005 .040 pit Mid 22 27
Low 14, 17, 19 20
Centerline

= Defect introduced into test specimen

gage section (not to scale) 0.250
± 0.010
The HELIX32 spectrum is a truncated version of the
0.060 R
full HELIX spectrum. This spectrum is
4PL
0.500 representative of 190.5 flight hours for an outboard
± 0.010
main rotor blade. The full HELIX spectrum contains
SECTION A - A 2,132,024 cycles, and the truncated HELIX32
Figure 2. Dog-bone Specimen spectrum contains 145,862 cycles

For the spectrum testing the HELIX32 spectrum was

Test Plan reduced to the eight load level spectrum presented
in Table 2. This reduced spectrum retained all R-
The specimens were tested with two different values ( min/ max) of the HELIX32 spectrum up to R
reduced stress spectra. The first based on the =0.60, and the majority of cycles in both spectra are
standard HELIX32 [2] spectrum, and a second at R = 0.4. In Table 2 the large block of cycles at R
based on a Sikorsky rotor blade data. Both spectra = 0.4 has been divided into 4 separate blocks. A
are representative of the outer section of a main characteristic of the HELIX32 spectra is that the
rotor blade spar. The HELIX spectrum is variation in the maximum load in the spectra is
representative of a hinged rotor, and the Sikorsky small, and therefore crack growth load interaction
rotor blade spectrum is a elastomeric bearing effects should be small.
design
Table 2 Reduced HELIX32 Spectrum
The test matrix is shown in Table 1. For each
surface condition and spectra fatigue, tests were R Max Min Load # cycles
conducted at three spectrum stress levels with three Load
replicates at each stress level, resulting in 72 fatigue 0.4 92 37 2120
tests. The stress levels in Table 1 are the
-0.2 100 -20 10
maximum spectrum gage section stresses at which
the fatigue tests were conducted. All other stresses 0.4 92 37 2120
in the reduced spectra were adjusted by the factor 0.54 90 49 490
of the maximum stress in Table 1. The low stress 0.4 92 37 2120
levels sometimes contain multiple maximum stress 0.25 96 24 890
levels, which were adjusted as appropriate during 0.4 92 37 2120
the testing. 0.18 88 16 130
total 10000
The reduced spectrum was developed to provide were then single point turned on a CNC lathe. Final
the same analytical life predictions as the HELIX32 polishing was done with 6-micron diamond paste
spectrum. Life predictions for each spectrum were producing a mirror like finish.
compared using a Miner’s cumulative damage
model, as well as a fracture mechanics crack The flat “dogbone” specimens where machined from
closure model. An initial crack size (EIFS) of 0.001 specimen blanks that were cut from the Al7075-T73
inches was used in generating the fracture forged bars using a bandsaw allowing at least 0.1
mechanics analysis. The Miner’s cumulative inch per face for finish machining clean-up.
damage predictions were based on available Alcoa Specimen faces were then milled to thickness,
AL7075-T73 fatigue data [3] which was very similar removing approximately equal stock on each side, A
to the unnotched constant amplitude fatigue data variety of aggressive milling feeds and speeds were
obtained in constant amplitude testing. evaluated to obtain the rough 80 rms surface finish
required for the baseline as-machined surface
Table 3 Reduced Sikorsky rotor blade spectrum finish. The surface finish was measured with a
Taylor Hobsen Talysurf Form 50 instrument and a
R Max Min # cycles measured roughness of 80 μinch rms (72.55 μinch
Load Load Ra) was verified.
-.08 100 -8 29
.10 60 6 46
.20 55 11 367 Method to Produce Corrosion Pits
.30 60 18 483
.40 55 22 260 Corrosion pits were produced in the Al7075-T73
rough machined dog-bone specimens using a two
.50 97 48.5 80 step process involving drilling and electro-chemical
.50 55 27.5 200 etching. Specimens gage sections were masked
.60 62 37.2 30 using two coats of Super-Corpon urethane-
.70 53 37.1 51 compatible epoxy primer. Starter pits were then
total 1546 drilled through the primer and into the base metal.
Carbide 0.046 inch diameter drills were used to drill
starter holes for 0.005 inch deep flaws, and 0.076
inch diameter drills were used to drill starter holes
for 0.040 inch deep flaws. A Struers Movipol-3 spot-
The Sikorsky main rotor blade spectrum was
polishing unit was then used to electro-chemically
reduced to the nine load level spectrum presented
etch the drilled holes to final depth. Etching
in Table 3. This reduced spectrum retained the R-
parameters for 0.005 inch deep pits were 5 volts at
value distribution of the main rotor blade spectrum
0.015 amps for 60 seconds, and for 0.040 inch deep
spectrum. In crack growth analyses the modified
pits were 15 volts at 0.1-0.5 amps for five minutes.
Sikorsky outboard blade spectrum is randomized
The depth of each flaw was measured with a depth
and large blocks of cycles were divided. When this
measuring microscope.
is done the reduced spectrum has been shown to
provide similar crack growth times to the
randomized full spectrum. A characteristic of the
Sikorsky main rotor blade spectrum is that it has Test Results and Analysis
significantly more variation in the maximum
spectrum load than the HELIX spectra, and Spectrum load fatigue tests were performed by the
therefore crack growth load interaction effects will Unitied Technologies Research Center (UTRC) and
be greater. the Army Vehicle Technology Center on a total of 72
Al7075-T73 specimens in accordance with the
Table 1 test matrix. This testing included two
spectra, four surface conditions, three stress levels
Specimen Manufacturer
for each spectra, and three replicates at each stress
level.
For the unnotched round bar specimens, one-inch
square by 4.25 inch long blanks were rough-cut The spectrum test results for as-machined and .005
from the Al7075-T73 forged bars with specimen corrosion pits are plotted in the form of mean life “S-
axes parallel to the rolling direction. These blanks N” curves of maximum spectrum stress versus
cycles to failure. The test results were compared
against a NASGRO 3.0 crack growth model and
Miner’s linear cumulative damage analysis
predictions.
The NASGRO 3.0 crack growth base model for
Al7075-T73 forged material was based on the
closure (strip yield) model, and was developed from
constant amplitude fatigue test data [1]. The base
model was developed to fit fatigue test data for
stress ratios of –0.5, 0.1, and 0.5. The constant
amplitude test specimens were ASTM E466
polished round bar specimens. For the polished
specimens the best fit EIFS (semicircular crack) was
a 0.0010 inch depth with a range from 0.0006 to
0.0044 inches. The base crack growth model was
then used to develop best fit and ranges of EIFS’s
for constant amplitude, as-machined, and 0.005 and
0.040 inch deep corrosion pit fatigue test results at a
stress ratio R = -1.0. The semicircular EIFS best fits
and ranges were 0.0030 inches deep and ranged
between 0.0020 to 0.0045 for the as-machined
specimens, 0.0050 inches deep ranging from
0.0037 to 0.0065 for the 0.005 inch deep corrosion
pits, and 0.013 ranging between 0.0084 and 0.017
for the 0.040 inch deep corrosion pits. The EIFS for
the polished specimens were very reasonable when
compared with the measured bulk material and
crack origin (Fe, Mn)Al6 and Mg2Si inclusion particle
sizes.
The Miner’s linear cumulative damage model was
based on the same constant amplitude fatigue test
used to develop the crack growth models. This
included fatigue data for the polished, as-machined,
and the flawed specimens. For the polished
specimen, fatigue test data was available for stress
ratios of R = -0.5, 0.1 and 0.5, and from this test
data a mean constant life diagram was constructed
for the full range of R values in the reduced spectra.
Alcoa data [3]which was found to agree with this
project data was also used for guidance in
extending to a stress ratio of –1.0. A mean constant
life diagram was then constructed to cover the
range of stress ratios in the reduced spectra
assuming that the ratio of vibratory stress at any
given steady stress had the same ratio to the R =-1
vibratory stress as for the polished specimens (i.e.
the polished and as machined constant life
diagrams had the same “shape”). For the corrosion
pitted specimens constant amplitude test data was
available for R = -1.0, for both 0.005 and 0.040 inch
corrosion pit depths. In order to extend this data to
other stress ratios a constant-life diagram was
constructed using a notched constant-life diagram
shape. This notched shape was derived from
0.040 deep gouge specimen data at R = -1.0, -0.5,
and 0.5 [4]. The constant-life diagrams for 1e4
cycles to failure were constructed using previously
generated data, and extrapolations of the constant
amplitude data.
The results of the spectrum fatigue tests as well as
the crack growth model and Miner’s linear
cumulative damage analyses for the as-machined
and .005 corrosion pit specimens are presented in
Figures 3 through 6. Table 4 provides a summary of
the best-fit EIFS for the constant amplitude fatigue
tests, and for both the reduced HELIX32 and the
Sikorsky main rotor blade spectra fatigue tests.
This table also shows the range of EIFS to fit each
data point in the constant amplitude and spectra
fatigue tests. It is noted that the data and analysis
provided in the plots and Table 4 are for unnotched
(Kt = 1.0).
In general the crack closure model based on the
constant amplitude EIFS provided as good or better
fits to the spectrum fatigue data as the Miner’s
cumulative damage model. The Miner’s cumulative
damage analysis tended to over predict the
spectrum fatigue test cycles to failure for the
polished and rough machined specimens. The
crack growth models based on the constant
amplitude EIFS also tended to over predict cycles to
failure for the polished specimens, but gave fairly
good results for the rough machined specimens.
While the Miner’s cumulative damage analysis gave
reasonable fits to the 0.005 inch deep corrosion pit
test results, the closure crack growth model
provides a better fit to the data. It is noted that if the
constant life diagram for the corrosion pits had been
developed based on an unnotched rather than
notched shape, the Miner’s cumulative damage
model would have significantly over predicted the
spectrum fatigue test results.
 60
60

50
50

40
Peak stress (ksi)

40

Peak stress (ksi)

30
30
Run-out
20
20
..
Run-out
10
10

0
0
1.E+04 1.E+05 1.E+06 1.E+07 1.E+08
1.E+04 1.E+05 1.E+06 1.E+07 1.E+08
N (cycles to failure, Fracture)
N (cycles to failure, Fracture)

Solid = Best Fit (.008 EIFS)

Solid = Best Fit (.0025 EIFS)
Dashed = .005 EIFS (Constant Amplitude)
Dashed = .003 EIFS (Constant Amplitude)
Heavy Solid = Palgrem-Miner
Heavy Solid = Palgrem-Miner
Diamonds = Data
Diamonds = Data
Figure 3 Reduced HELIX32 Spectrum Figure 5 Reduced HELIX32 Spectrum
As-Machined (80 rms) Specimen Corrosion Pit 0.005 Inch Depth

60
60

50
50

40
Peak stress (ksi)

40
Peak stress (ksi)

30
30
.. Run-out

20 ..
20
Run-outs

10 10

0 0
1.E+04 1.E+05 1.E+06 1.E+07 1.E+08 1.E+04 1.E+05 1.E+06 1.E+07 1.E+08
N (cycles to failure, Fracture) N (cycles to failure, Fracture)

Solid = Best Fit (.004 EIFS) Dashed = .005 EIFS (Best Fit & Constant Amp)
Dashed = .003 EIFS (Constant Amplitude) Heavy Solid = Palgrem-Miner
Heavy Solid = Palgrem-Miner Diamonds = Data
Diamonds = Data

Figure 4 Reduced Sikorsky Spar Spectrum Figure 6 Reduced Sikorsky Spar Spectrum
As-Machined (80 rms) Specimen Corrosion Pit 0.005 Inch Depth
 Table 4 Equivalent Initial Flaw Sizes based on an EIFS of 0.010 depth would provide a
Semicircular Crack Depths, Kt = 1.0 guidance in developing a structure tolerant to both a
rough machined condition as well as barely visible
Surface Configuration EIFS (inches) corrosion and other “natural flaws” up to 0.005
inches in depth. An inspection interval or
Polished – Best Fit 0.0010
replacement time based on an EIFS of 0.026 inch
– Range 0.0006-0.0044 depth would provide further protection for clearly
visible corrosion and other “natural flaws” up to
Constant 80 rms – Best Fit 0.0030
Amplitude – Range 0.0020 - 0.0045 0.040 inches in depth. In notched areas (e.g.
stress concentrations greater than 2.5) replacement
.005 Corr. – Best Fit 0.0047
– Range 0.0037 – 0.0065
times and inspection intervals based on these
EIFS’s may be conservative, although additional
.040 Corr. – Best Fit 0.0130 testing is required develop the notched condition.
– Range 0.0084 – 0.0165
Corrosion pits and other “natural flaws” of 0.040
Polished – Best Fit 0.0015 inch depth can be detected by close visual
– Range 0.0012 – 0.0016
inspection. Detection for actual EIFS cracks of
Reduced 80 rms – Best Fit 0.0025 0.026 inch depth is difficult.
HELIX32 – Range 0.0017 – 0.0035
.005 Corr. – Best Fit 0.0080 It is recommended that additional constant
– Range 0.0060 – 0.0110 amplitude and spectrum testing be conducted to
.040 Corr. – Best Fit 0.0150 investigate appropriate EIFS for defects such as
– Range 0.0090 – 0.0027 corrosion at stress concentrations, and in other
Polished – Best Fit 0.0020 materials such as Ti-6Al-4V beta-stoa, and 4340
– Range 0.0016 – 0.0038 steel.
Reduced 80 rms – Best Fit 0.0040
Sikorsky – Range 0.0032 – 0.0065 Acknowledgements
Spectrum
.005 Corr. – Best Fit 0.0050 The author wishes to recognize the significant
– Range 0.0024 – 0.0069
contributions made to this work by George
.040 Corr. – Best Fit 0.0130 Schneider and Jinlu Wang. The author also
– Range 0.0080 – 0.0238
acknowledges the Rotorcraft Industry Technology
Association (RITA) under Cooperative Agreement
Conclusions and Recommendations No: NCCW-0076 between RITA and NASA for
research entitled Advanced Rotorcraft Technology
for their support of this work
In conclusion, significant advantages of the crack
growth model are as follows:
1. In general the crack growth models provide
References
better predictions to the spectrum load results
than the Miner’s cumulative damage model
1. Forman, R.G., Shivakumar, V., Mettu, S.R., Newman,
2. Developing empirical constant life diagrams J.C., NASGRO v3 Theoretical and Operational
from limited fatigue data (S-N data) is tricky. Manual, NASA doc # JCS-22267B, currently;
Care must be exercised as to whether Southwest Research Institute, www.nasgro.swri.org.
unnotched or notched constant amplitude Oct 1997
behavior is appropriate. Once basic crack 2. Edwards, P.R., Darts, J., Standardised Fatigue
growth rate data (da/dN vs ΔKeff) is available Loading Sequences for Helicopter Rotors (HELIX and
FELIX), Part 2: Final Definition of HELIX and FELIX,
for a material, it seems that reasonable EIFS’s
Royal Aircraft Establishment, Technical Report
can be developed from limited fatigue data. 84085, August 1984.
3. If spectrum fatigue data is available it is easier 3. Magnusen, P.E., Bucci, R.J., Hinkle, A.J.,
to adjust EIFS, within reasonable bounds, to fit Brockenbrough, J.R., Konish, H.J., Miyasato, S.M.,
the spectrum data then to adjust the Miner’s ‘The Role of Microstructure on the Fatigue Durability
of Aluminum Aircraft Alloys,’ Alcoa Technical Report,
cumulative damage model. ONR Contract N00014-91-C-0128, 1005
4. Schneider, G.J., Wang J., Damage Tolerance for
In an unnotched area of an Al7075-T73 component Helicopter Structures, RITA technical report no. TR
for the spectra considered, a replacement time 99-02-4.1-P3, February 2000