2017 USAF Aircraft Structural Integrity Program Conference

Jacksonville FL

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

29 November, 2017

Dale Ball

Aeronautics Company

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited, LM PIRA AER201711009.
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 0: terminology
• Model – a mathematical representation of a physical
behavior / process / phenomenon
• Empirical (eg. curve-fit to measured data, neural net trained on
measured data, etc.)
• Physics-based (i.e. model addresses underlying mechanical /
physical phenomena that lead to the behavior being simulated)
• Hybrid or combination of the two
• Verification – the process of demonstrating that a given
model has been correctly implemented (i.e. in software)
and is being correctly solved / executed:
• We’re doing the math right
• Validation – the process of demonstrating that a given model
correctly represents / simulates a physical / mechanical
phenomenon:
• We’re doing the right math
Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

• Step 1: develop models
• Step 2: determine appropriate validation metrics
• Step 3: validate models

Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 1: develop models
• Develop analytical models that simulate mechanical / physical behavior – for ERS
this includes models for:
• Residual stress (RS) field generation and stability under mechanical / thermal loading
• Stress intensity factor (SIF), or other fracture parameter, for complex stress fields, structural
details, and crack shapes
• Material behavior (physical, thermal, mechanical, damage mechanisms, etc.)
• Behaviors / parameters that must be addressed – for ERS this includes:
• Residual stress (RS) installation / process modeling
• Cold-worked holes
• Applied and retained expansion, sleeve gap position, post ream, etc.
• Conventional shot peening
• Intensity, coverage, etc.
• Laser shock peening
• Power, coverage, etc.
• Low plasticity burnishing
• Normal force, coverage, etc.
Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 1: develop models
• Behaviors / parameters that must be addressed (cont’d):
• RS installation / process modeling (cont’d)
• Body geometry (D, e/D, t/D, etc.)
• Plate, mandrel, sleeve material constitutive relations (elastic, elastic-plastic)
• Pre-existing crack / damage
• Structural behavior modeling
• Body geometry (D, e/D, t/D, etc.)
• Hole-filling condition (open, neat-filled, interference-fit bushing, interference-fit pin or
fastener)
• Applied loading / local stress (bypass, bending, fastener or pin bearing)
• Service loading induced RS field evolution
• Plate material constitutive relations (elastic, elastic-plastic, elasto-visco-plastic?)
• Plate material fatigue & fracture properties (cycle s-e, e-N, FCGR, fracture toughness)

Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 1: develop models
• Behaviors / parameters that must be addressed (cont’d):
• FCI modeling
• Initial stress-stain vs. static pre-load
• Mean stress and/or strain correction (mean stress effects)
• CA loading
• VA (spectrum) loading
• FCG modeling
• SIF for complex stress fields
• SIF for complex crack shapes
• FCGR data and modeling
• FCG behavior with significant / complex closure
• CA loading
• VA (spectrum) loading

Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 1: develop models
• In theory, we would like to have physics-based models for every step in the ERS
domain
• Generally applicable throughout subject domain, not just at explicit points where data are
available
• Required for true ‘predictive’ capability
• Get validation, not just correlation
• In practice however
• Physics-based model development requires significant investment
• Empirical models are often ‘good enough’
• Hybrid models, in which the significant physics are addressed, and then correlation or
correction factors are applied, have great utility and are very widely used
• In the ERS domain
• Acceptance of DaDT analysis with explicit representation of residual stress will require
further development and validation of physics-based models
Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 2: determine appropriate validation metrics
• Residual stress field, initial
• UQ for initial RS required
• Metric for validation of computed RS (agreement
between computed and measured RS) is TBD calculated RS within TBD %
• Residual stress field, after service loading of measured RS for all x,y
• Models for mechanical / thermal relaxation of RS
are in work
• Permanent deformation due to RS calculated Ir within TBD %
installation of measured Ir for all Io
• Metric for agreement between computed and
measured Ir for cold worked holes is TBD

Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 2: determine appropriate validation metrics
• FCG growth rate
• Increased emphasis on R<0 behavior
• FCG life
• Metric for agreement between computed and calculated c within TBD % of measured c for all c
measured c is TBD
• Critical crack size
• FCG life scatter factor
• Must account for increased scatter observed for
crack growth in compressive residual stress
fields

Loss of Cw benefit after compression underload

Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 2: determine appropriate validation metrics
• FCG life scatter factor (SF) critical
• Use experimentally determined SF crack size

to establish one of the metrics To

(goals) for DaDTA validation, i.e. if mean time to failure (FCG test lives)

all predictions are within SF * test Tio

crack size
time to specified R (based
life, or 1/SF * test life, then on test population)
reliability = 0.99999 (or other) is
To/2
achieved
• In the absence of residual stress
(RS=0), SF for FCG is 2
• We have some evidence that
flight hours
when residual stress is tensile
(RS>0), SF=2 is still adequate FCG life scatter factor = 2 is adequate

Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 2: determine appropriate validation metrics
• FCG life scatter factor
critical
• For compressive RS, we have some crack size
evidence that scatter in FCG life
To
increases with increasingly mean time to failure (FCG test lives)
compressive RS Tio

crack size
• Recommend evaluate existing test time to specified R
(based on test
data and generate new test data for population)

typical details with RS

• Determine SF for R=0.99999 (or
negotiated value)
• Define metric for calculated FCG life
based on increased SF (all predictions flight hours

within SF * test life or 1/SF * test life) FCG life scatter factor > 2 is required

Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 3: validate models
• Validate models using building block residual stress installation
approach process model

• For physic-based models, validation usually cyclic notch plasticity / RS

follows ‘atomistic’ approach – break process mechanical relaxation
model
into sub-processes
damage / fracture
• Validate individual sub-processes / effects parameter model (eg. SIF)
first, then validate models for integrated
interacting sub-processes damage progression /
integration model (eg.
FCGR)

failure model

possible sub-process models for overall

‘crack in RS field life prediction’ model
Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
 Non-Technical Information

Validation of ERS DaDT Analysis

Step 3: validate models
• Deterministic DaDT methods and data are designed to predict mean life.
• Validated model should produce modeled vs. measured correlation ratios with mean of
1, and min > 1/DLSF and max < DLSF
• Appropriate design life scatter factor (DLSF) should be based on aleatory uncertainty of
underlying physical phenomenon / process
• Use of validated model produces detail for which 99.999% of population expected to
have life > Nmean/DLSF

Use or disclosure of the information contained herein is subject to the restrictions on the Cover Page
© 2017 Lockheed Martin Corporation, All Rights Reserved.