Bruce D. Snyder, t Joe G. Burns, 1 and Vipperla B.

Venkayya ~

Composite Bolted Joints Analysis Programs

REFERENCE: Snyder, B. D., Burns, J. G., and Venkayya, V. B., P(k) Fastener load
"Composite Bolted Joints Analysis Programs," Journal of Compos- P, Bypass load
ites Technology & Research, JCTRER, Vol. 12, No. 1, Spring 1990, t Lap thickness
pp. 41-51.
t, Effective thickness reacting bolt hole
ABSTRACT: Several different composite bolted joint analysis pro- T Temperature
grams are now available to composite structures designers. All of the Ti Internal load in member i
programs vary widely in the amount of input required, output re- AT (To..r.,,o.- T~se.,~,,.)
ceived, and required user knowledge of composite materials. Six u Displacement in the x direction
different bolted joint analysis programs will be examined. The various v Displacement in the y direction
programs are (1) A4EJ, (2) BJSFM, (3) SASCJ, (4) SAMCJ,
(5) SCAN, and (6) JOINT. Other analysis programs exist, but they w Lap width
apply many constraints on the problem definition and depend heavily a Coefficient of thermal expansion
on empirical test results. The relative merits of each program as well Displacement
as their disadvantages will be discussed. The most appropriate ap- In-plane strains
plications of each of the programs will be presented, and some nu-
merical comparisons of the results will be made. Each of the programs v Poisson's ratio
has a useful place in the design and analysis arena. An examination ~, Mapping function
of the programs will be made to help users determine which program ere Bending stress
will best suit their needs. ~r, Bypass stress
~r Shear stress
KEYWORDS: composites, bolted joints, analysis, design
qb, Complex functions

Nomenclature
Introduction
ai Complex coefficient
a~j Series coefficients Composite materials possess both the qualities of light weight
Aq Laminate compliances and high strength. Lightweight composite structures must be
b Radius of hole efficiently designed to take full advantage of their qualities.
C Half-distance between outer rows of bolts (for single lap Building structures with composite materials is very different
joints) from building strictly with metals. Although composites offer
d Bolt hole diameter high strength with less weight, an inefficiently designed com-
e Edge distance posite structure can easily weigh more than an equivalent metal
E Modulus of elasticity structure. Joints are key elements of composite structures and
F Complex stress function are the weakest links in the overall performance of a structure.
F~. Ultimate bearing stress allowable Composite joints can cause problems because of delamination,
F,. Ultimate joint shear stress allowable anisotropy, absence of ductility and environmental effects when
F,. Ultimate tensile stress allowable they are not properly designed. Methods of joining metal to
Fo7 Stress value at .7 × E on the stress-strain curve composite and composite to composite in substructure is an area
K Bending moment coefficient for single lap joint Mo of increased emphasis [1].
K. Stress concentration factor for unloaded hole The two most common ways of joining composite structures
/(,2 Stress concentration factor for loaded hole are adhesive bonding and bolting. Both joining methods have
l Lap step length advantages and disadvantages associated with them. Bonded
Mo Bending moment at edge of overlap joints have their place in structures, but they have problems such
N Stress resultants as debonding, susceptibility to impact damage, higher construc-
N~ Allowable joint stress resultant tion costs, and inaccessibility after construction. Bolted joints
p, Running shear load in member i also have problems that must be accounted for such as bearing
Pb Bolt bearing load failures, bolt pullout, and delamination. Bolted joints are gen-
erally capable of carrying higher loads than an equivalent bonded
1Aerospace engineer, aerospace engineer, Member AIAA Flight Dy- structure. Bolted joints also tend to weigh more than bonded
namics Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH 45433. joints but for major structural components, the extra weight is

© 1990 by the American Society for Testing and Materials 0885-6804/90/0003-0041 $02.50.
41

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
42 JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES TECHNOLOGY & RESEARCH

worth the added strength. For major structural components, the and
joints are usually bolted together. Mechanically fastened joints
can provide structures that are more reliable, maintainable, ac- 1
cessible, and cost effective. When properly designed, composite k = 1 + ~C + 1,~2C~ (4)
layups and joints can be tailored to efficiently carry the structural
design loads. (2 _ 12(1 - V2"N~] (5)
With the high costs associated with designing and testing com- E?
posite materials, methods of analytically determining the
strength of composite structures have been developed. Analytical where the allowable joint stress resultant N~, depends on the
methods are preferred because of their potential for generality, failure mode. For a tensile mode of failure
economy, and exactness, and are principally formulated from
two-dimensional anisotropic elasticity theory. An examination N, = F,,t(1 - d/w) (6)
of the analytical methods used to determine the strength of bolted
composite joints will be performed. All of the analysis methods P,Ka + Pb~K~z + 3K(1 - d/w)
for bolted joints are in use in industry today [2].
For a bearing failure
Joint Analysis Code
/~,t d
JOINT is a composite joint analysis code developed by the N~- (7)
Douglas Aircraft Company from 1976 to 1978 [3]. The code is Pbw
capable of analyzing both bonded and bolted joints from an
interactive graphics terminal. JOINT is based on a simplified For a bolt shear failure
theory that relies on empirical test data for its simplicity. JOINT
is capable of analyzing the following types of joints: balanced ~r F~.(bolt)d d
X~ - (8)
double-lap, supported single-lap, stepped-lap, and unsupported 2 P~ w
single-lap. The code is capable of performing a limited type
(brute force, trial, and error) of joint optimization on the fol- For a bolt tear-out failure
lowing types of infinite width bolted joints: double-lap, sup-
ported single-lap, and unsupported single-lap. For the optimi- ,9,
zation, the code determines the number of bolt rows, bolt N~ = 2 -0.5 Pb w
diameter, bolt spacing, and joint thickness for the lightest joint
that will carry the applied load. The coupling effects of the bolt The analysis is performed for an infinite width plate with a spec-
rows has been neglected, which can cause severe error for some ified bolt spacing through the width of the plate.
types of joint analysis. The JOINT analysis code makes several simplifying assump-
The code assumes a bypass stress equal to tions in the analysis. Test data must be used to obtain stress
concentration relief data for the composite plates. After the ex-
/,, P~ perimental data are obtained, the stress concentration factors
~, = g , , - + g,~ (1) are found. These concentration factors are used to determine
t(w - at) t~(w - d)
the stresses in the plate. Only uniaxial loadings can be applied
and a bending stress equal to to the joint. JOINT is not capable of analyzing compressively
loaded joints, and the analysis assumes that the fasteners do not
6Mo fail. For all of the different types of joints the JOINT program
o-b = f (2) can analyze, the following restrictions apply

e w 3
The stress concentration factors, K,1 and Ka, are derived from d
D ~
3 3 - < ~ - < 12 t - < d -d< m
1½ row pitch = 6d
test data. K,1 and Ka are functions of the diameter of the bolt
holes and widthwise bolt spacing w. The constants in the func-
tions are determined for an AS/3501-6 graphite epoxy composite Other limitations are
with different percentages of 0 ° plies. The code only has the • choice of two bolt materials, joint load limitation of 40 000
concentration factors calculated for composites with 25 and lb (18 144 kg)
37.5%, 0 ° plies. The bolt load distribution depends on the bolt • choice of two composite layups, limitation on the number
and joint flexibility, but bolt torque-up and bolt type are not of bolt rows
accounted for. The code allows four different failure modes: For a double-lap configuration, the thickness of the two
(1) tension at the hole, (2) bolt bearing, (3) bolt shear, and (4) outer splice plates must be one-half the thickness of the center
shear tear-out. The bearing stress is determined differently for plate. A stepped lap joint configuration assumes that the bolts
each type of failure. With the bending stress equal to cr~ = are at the center of the steps. Varying step lengths, bolt diam-
6Mo/f eters, and lengthwise spacing between bolts can be specified. All
bolt row coupling effects are neglected and the bolts are assumed
to be lined up one behind the other. For an optimization prob-
Mo = kN~2 (3)
lem, the bolts must be the same size for every bolt row. Bolt

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 SNYDER ET AL. ON BOLTED JOINTS ANALYSIS PROGRAMS 43

row spacing is assumed to be uniform for the whole joint. In
summary, the code applies quite a few constraints to problem
definitions and has a limited analysis and data output capability.
Problems do run very quickly, which allows many design itera-
tions to be performed in a short period of time.
A4EJ Analysis Code
A4EJ is a composite bolted joint analysis code developed by
the Douglas Aircraft Company from 1979 to 1981 [4]. A4EJ has
the capability to analyze multi-row joints having a nonlinear load-
deflection characteristic for the fasteners, and linear or Ramberg-
Osgood characterizations of the adherends. A4EJ accounts for
nonlinearities in the joint because of (1) fastener load-deflection
characteristics, (2) fastener clearance, (3) elastomechanical de-
formation of the members between the fasteners, and (4) inter-
action between bearing and bypass loads. A4EJ is based on
continuum mechanics techniques, requiring shorter computer
run times than finite-element modeling techniques. A4EJ pro-
vides a detailed definition of the internal load transfer within a
joint and requires a large amount of input data.
The load transfer through the fasteners within a joint is char-
acterized in terms of the relative displacement between the mem-
bers at each fastener station. A4EJ assumes a bilinear elastic
load deflection curve. The known boundary conditions are at
both ends of the joint. The problem is solved iteratively by start-
ing at one end of the joint and assuming a value for an unknown
quantity. The user can assume the total joint strength or the
displacement at the first fastener induced by a specified load. By
calculating progressively along the joint and satisfying both equi-
librium and compatability requirements, the reactions at the
other end of the joint can be determined. The initial assumption
can be modified until all the boundary conditions are satisfied
at both ends of the joint. The initial assumption must be very
close; otherwise the solution will diverge.
Figure 1 shows how the typical equations for each step of the
joint are established. The conditions of equilibrium for Member
1 between stations k and k + 1 are
~'~l(k+l ) : Tl(k ) -- P(k)+ pll(k) (10)
Similarly for Member 2
T~(,+,) = T~(k) + h , ) -p2t(k) (11)
Figure i shows a joint in single lap shear. In a double shear joint,
the two portions of Member 1 or 2 would be combined and the
fastener load P would be changed from single to double shear
values. To make sure the analysis complies with compatability
requirements, the mechanical and thermal properties of the
members must be used. The user must input the stiffness of each
member between each adjacent pair of fastener stations, allowing
variations in width and thickness. Provisions are also made for
thermally induced strains. The nonlinear load-deflection behav-
ior of materials is accounted for by using the Ramberg-Osgood
model for loading beyond the material proportional limit.

- ~ j~ T2(k.2 )

o ! -= 1' ........' ~ "--'I~TI (k.2)

.... I b=t .

",,IP-'-- ,,ip-,..*
"-'-1 . . . . . . . . l'-
STATION NO. k.2 k.1 P(k)'~' ' k;1
GEOMETRIC k÷2
A. GEOMETRY FASTENER
DISCONTINUITY STATION
t
i '2 l

!L ':-
J Pl ~ l, TI(k+I)'TI(k)-P(k)+Pl ~k)
i
k k+l B. F R E E - B O D Y DIAGRAMS
REFERENCE REFERENCE

FIG. 1--Loads and deformations on elements of bolted joint [4].

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
44 JOURNALOF COMPOSITESTECHNOLOGY & RESEARCH

The extension of the members between stations k and k + 1 active input of the data. Data for composite materials is input
is given by on the laminate level. A4EJ does have short turnaround times
and outputs joint failure load, fastener station loads, deflections
~l(k+l) -- ~l(k) : OtlATl(k) q- e~l(k) (12) and strains; however it is an iterative technique, and certain
values must be checked and adjusted to get the solution to con-
and verge. Joints in compression as well as tension can be analyzed.
A4EJ accounts for temperature effects, but only with respect to
~z(k+~) -- 82~k) = et2ATl(k) + ¢2l(k) (13) each material's coefficient of linear thermal expansion; A4EJ
does not account for material strength degradation with tem-
Any running load is applied uniformly along the length of the perature. Although A4EJ analyzes multi-row bolted joints, it is
joint, and in calculating the strains, the deformation is that which not capable of analyzing single fastener joints or joints with open
would be associated with the average member load in each seg- holes. A4EJ performs the same analysis on single-lap and double-
ment. The average loads causing the stretching of each member lap joints and does not account for single lap eccentricities. The
between stations k and k + 1 are exact fastener locations cannot be input, but are accounted for
by inputting the distances between fastener stations. Fasteners
T~(k+x~ = T~(~) - P(~) + pfl(k)/2 (14) are assumed to be evenly spaced throughout a row. A specific
plate loading can be input, and A4EJ can account for running
and shear loads, but biaxial loadings cannot be specified. Boundary
conditions can be input but are not required. A4EJ does not
T2~+~ = T2m + P~k~ - p2l~/2 (15) output the specific mode of failure, but the mode can be deter-
mined from the failure location and loads. A4EJ is not capable
The corresponding stresses are of calculating stress distributions around fasteners. A4EJ is ef-
fective in analyzing multi-row bolted joints; however users en-
counter difficulties in obtaining and inputting the required data.
T'fk) (16)
¢rl(k) : [Wl(k) tl(k)]
SASCJ Analysis Code
and
SASCJ is an acronym for Strength Analysis of Single Fastener
T2(k~ Composite Joints. The code was developed by the Northrop
(17) Corporation from 1983 through 1985 [5,6]. As the name implies,
°'2(k) = [w2(k ) t2(k)]
the code can only perform an analysis on single- or double-lap
For linear elastic materials, the equivalent strains would be joints connected with one fastener or plates with an open hole.
SASCJ has the capability to perform a two-dimensional analysis
__ orl(k)
of a finite bolted composite plate. The two-dimensional stress
(18) field in the finite bolted plate is expressed in terms of an Airy
6~(k) -- Et(k )
stress function, F(x,y), that automatically satisfies the equilib-
rium equations in the plate. The displacement solution satisfies
and
the compatability equations when
__ O'2(k)
(19) A2~ OAF 2Az6 04F 04F
~2(k ) -- E2(k ) bx--; - 0x-~0y + (2A~z + A~6) Ox20y 2

For ductile materials, the Ramberg-Osgood model is incorpo- O'F OAF

rated and the equivalent strains are calculated to be - 2A16 0 ~ y 3 + A~I--0y4 = 0 (22)

O"i O"i is satisfied by the Airy stress function. The laminate compliance
~ =• 1 + (i = 1,2) (20)
coefficients for the laminate are given by

After determining the member strains, the relative displacement = AN (23)

between the members at the next station is
where the matrices ~ and N are the in-plane strains and stress
~(k+l) : ~2(k+l ) -- ~1(k+i ) (21) resultants, respectively, in an anisotropic plate. The complex
stress function can be written as
as shown in Fig. 1. This allows a new increment of fastener load
transfer to be evaluated. After computing the bearing and bypass F(x, y) = 2Re [F1(zl) + F2(zz)] (24)
loads at each station, the failure criterion are checked to see if
the combination of the two loadings is capable of causing joint The complex stress functions F~(zl) and F2(z2) are analytic func-
failure. tions of the complex characteristic coordinates, z~ and z2, re-
A4EJ requires the user to input a relatively large amount of spectively. The coordinates zl and z2 are given by
empirical data for the materials that are being joined. The input
of the data is not user friendly, requiring formatted, noninter- z~ = x + I~y z2 = x + txzy (25)

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.

Using the complex stress function the complex functions
dF~ dFz
(1)l(Zl) = ~ 1 (~)2(Z2) = MZ----'7
are introduced. The above equations lead to the following
expressions for stresses and displacements in the plate
rr~ = 2 R e [lx2m;(z~) + ~x~qb;(z2)l
% = 2Re [~b~(z~) + +;(z2)]
%. = -2Re [IJLI(I);(z1) ~¢- ~J1~2(1)~(~#2)
] (29)
u = 2 R e [p1+~(z~) + pz+2(z2)]
v = 2Re [ql+~(z~) + q2+2(z:)]
where p,, p2, q~, and q: are defined as
Pl = a111x~ + A12 - A161-1q
P2 = Anl~ + A12 - AM.I,2
A
ql = A121*1 + --2---2- A26
tXl
A mode, joint loads at specified nodal points, and an echo of a
q2 = A12~2 + --2~ _ A26
~2
The complex functions, +1 and +~, automatically satisfy the gov-
erning equation. For a finite geometry problem with specified
boundary conditions, the complex functions cannot be solved so
a Laurent series expansion is used
+1(61) = e~o In ~1 + ~ (a-,,6;" + a.6]')
n=l
+~(62) = [3o In 62 + ~ ([3°62" + [3,67)
n=l
Mapping functions are incorporated into the expansions to make
the series converge faster. The rigid body rotation constraint and
single valuedness of the displacement constraint are imposed on
the complex functions. The complex coefficients of the series
expansions are determined, and the displacements and stresses
can be calculated using Eqs 27 through 31. To get an accurate
solution, approximately 100 collocation points are used in the
expansion at the hole boundary. These points are sufficient to
recover the imposed boundary conditions at the edges of the
plate and at the hole boundary. With an open hole the imposed
boundary conditions are self-equilibrating. With a loaded hole,
a cosine bolt load distribution is assumed for the hole boundary.
This bolt load distribution is equilibrated to the imposed exter-
nally applied loads. The bolt in a loaded hole plate is modeled
as a Timoshenko beam on an elastic foundation. A finite-dif-
ference approximation of the governing equation is used to de-
termine the loading distribution and displacements on the plate.
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
SNYDER ET AL. ON BOLTED JOINTS ANALYSIS PROGRAMS 45
SASCJ uses a progressive failure procedure that predicts local
ply failures and combines them to get the plate strength.
(26) The SASCJ analysis code considers many of the complexities
of composite bolted joints. The symmetry of a double-lap shear
problem is taken into account in the problem to reduce the
amount of input required and computation time. Bilinear elastic
ply behavior is assumed. No fastener friction effects are taken
into account in the code, but an approximation to the fastener
and plate contact is incorporated by an assumed radial stress
(27)
distribution. The user must specify a bypass ratio for the joint.
The bypass ratio is the ratio of load carried by the plates to the
(28)
load carried by the fastener. This quantity is dependent on how
much torque is applied to a fastener when it is tightened. An
edge distance to bolt diameter ratio must be greater than 3, and
the plate width to bolt diameter ratio must be greater than 4.
(30) SASCJ allows for protruding and countersunk head fasteners.
The only difference the analysis makes between the two types
(31) of fasteners is in the determination of the boundary conditions
for the bolt. The protruding head fasteners are given fixed bound-
ary conditions at both ends. The countersunk fasteners are given
a free boundary condition at the countersunk head and a fixed
(32) boundary condition at the bolted end. The analysis assumes that
the fasteners do not fail. The failure criteria are checked at
(33) locations specified by the user. The input data for the failure
criteria depends on the failure option chosen: point stress, av-
erage stress, maximum strain, or Hoffman/Tsai-ttill. The same
(34) failure prediction procedure is used for all of the plates in the
bolted joint. The SASCJ analysis code outputs the following joint
properties upon completion of the analysis: failure load, failure
(35)
limited amount of the input data. The SASCJ code at Wright-
Patterson AFB has been modified to output the stresses, strains,
and displacements at the hole boundary at the failure load. The
code cannot determine stresses in a joint for a given load but a
tensile or compressive loading can be specified. The analysis
accounts for the actual laminate stacking sequence and asym-
metric laminates can be input. SASCJ considers fastener bend-
ing, torque, and shear in the analysis. For most cases, the code
(36) runs relatively slowly. SASCJ is a versatile code that can analyze
most single fastener joints.
(37)
BJSFM Analysis Code
BJSFM was developed by the McDonnell Aircraft Company
from 1978 to 1981 [7,8]. BJSFM is an acronym for Bolted Joint
Stress Field Model. BJSFM can predict stress distributions and
perform failure analysis of an anisotropic double-lap plate with
a single loaded or unloaded fastener hole. The analysis is based
on (1) anisotropic theory of elasticity, (2) lamination plate the-
ory, and (3) a failure hypothesis. The principle of elastic super-
position is used to obtain laminate stress distributions as a result
of the combination of bearing and bypass loading. The developed
analysis can be used with various failure criteria to predict lam-
inate load carrying capability. The derivation of the equations
used in the BJSFM and SASCJ codes are identical up to Eq 35.
BJSFM uses conformal mapping techniques to obtain exact so-
lutions for an infinite plate with a circular hole and uniform
stresses at infinity. A mapping function, used to map the circular
boundary of radius b in the zk plane onto a unit circle in the ~k
plane is given by
46 JOURNALOF COMPOSITES TECHNOLOGY & RESEARCH

zk-+ X/z~ - b2 - ~b 2 b P i ( - 1 ) (..... '/2(2 + imp.a) (49)

~ = (38)
a2m = - [.rrm2(m: _ 4)(ix2 _ ~ll.1)]
b(1 - i ~ k ) k = 1, 2

The sign of the square root is chosen such that the hole is mapped
to a unit circle. The equations used to this point contain complex
The above equations completely define the elastic stress distri-
stress functions qbl(Zl) and ~b~(z~),which for an infinite plate, will
bution of an infinite, two-dimensional, anisotropic material con-
have the general form
taining a circular hole. Although the solutions are valid only for
homogeneous materials, they are assumed to be valid for lami-
(bl(Zl) = B~z~ + al In G + ~ alml~;m (39) nates that are symmetric. The laminate compliance coefficients
m=l A,k are derived using classical lamination plate theory with
unidirectional material elastic constants, and ply angular orien-
tations and thicknesses. The material compliance constitutive
1~)2(Z2) = BeZ2 + a2 In ~2 -}- ~ a2m{2 m (40)
m=l relations are used to determine the laminate strains. Strains for
the individual plies along lamina principal material axes are cal-
For the stress to be uniform at infinity, z 1 and z2 must be linear. culated using coordinate transformations and by assuming that
Terms with In El and In ~2 are present whenever the resultant of the laminate strain remains constant through the thickness. The
the applied stresses on the circular boundary are nonzero. The principle of superposition is used to obtain stress distributions
aim and a2,, coefficients are used to satisfy the boundary conditions resulting from an arbitrary set of in-plane loads. The "charac-
on the circular hole. Only the linear terms and the first coefficient teristic dimension" hypothesis of Whitney and Nuismer [9] is
of the summation are used for the unloaded hole solution. For used to model inelastic or nonlinear material behavior at the hole
the loaded hole solution, a radial stress boundary condition is boundary. Various material failure criteria can be used with the
specified, which varies as a cosine over half the hole. The linear characteristic dimension failure hypothesis. The failure criteria
terms in the above equations are not required because the bound- options are Tsai-Hill, maximum stress, maximum strain, Hoff-
ary conditions at infinity result in stress free conditions since the man, and modified Tsai-Wu. Finite width has a significant impact
finite force, which balances the bolt load, is applied to an infinite on the circumferential stress distribution around a loaded fas-
boundary. The long-term coefficients are determined by impos- tener hole. Finite-width effects are evaluated by superimposing
ing single valued displacement conditions since the specified hole stress distributions from loaded and unloaded hole infinite plate
loading is not self-equilibrating on the boundary. The following solutions. The bolt load is reacted by tensile and compressive
simultaneous equations are given for the a, and a~ complex coef- loads of P/2 in the loaded hole analysis. The loading on the bolt
ficients and overall equilibrium is obtained by superimposing the solution
for an unloaded hole under a remote tensile loading of P/2. The
p2 .
ai - al + a2 - a2 = ~
Z
"iT1 (41) resulting stress distribution approximates the state of stress in a
plate with finite width very well. The distribution differs from
an exact solution by giving nonzero superimposed normal and
~1al - ~1al + 1,1,2a2 - l,£2a2 - Pa ¢ri (42) shear stresses at the edge of the plate.
2 BJSFM does not require the user to input a large amount of
data, and the input procedure is user friendly. The data are input
ixla
2 1 _ ~2al + 1.12a2 - - -t.L2a2
-2- = -A12P2 A16p1 (43)
interactively, but if a mistake is discovered after a response to
2Tr/a22 a prompt is already entered, the user must start over from the
beginning. BJSFM has a very short turnaround time and offers
a_.zl _ -~_21 + a2 -d2 _ A12p~ + A26p2 (44) a variety of output options and failure criteria. BJSFM can ac-
P~l al la,2 52 2"rriA22 count for material anisotropy, general in-plane loadings (tension,
compression, biaxiality, and shear bearing), and different hole
The al,, and a2,, coefficients are determined .by expressing the sizes. BJSFM can also account for composites that are made of
radial stress boundary conditions on the hole in terms of a Fourier more than one type of material. Only mechanical properties for
Series and equating the series representation of the solution. The the basic unidirectional ply lamina are required to obtain strength
coefficients are predictions. BJSFM does not account for compressive or tem-
perature effects, and has joint geometry restrictions. When in-
bP,(1 + itx~) putting the plate properties, BJSFM uses the thickness of each
a 1 2 - [16(Ix:- p.1)] (45) ply orientation normalized by the total plate thickness. BJSFM
views a joint as a single plate with an equivalent loading from a
second plate. The properties and geometry of the second plate
bPi(1 + itxl)
a22 - [16(Ix2 - t*1)] for m = 4, 6, 8 . . . . (46) never enter into the analysis. Although BJSFM accounts for the
percentages of plies of different orientations for composite ma-
terials, it does not account for the ply layup sequence. BJSFM
aim = a2,, = 0 f o r m = 1, 3 , 5 . . . . (47) can output stresses, strains, and displacements at fixed distances
and angular locations about the bolt hole. BJSFM is a useful tool
b P i ( - 1 ) (m 1)/2(2 + imp.2) that can produce a significant amount of information about a
(48)
al,,, = - [.rrmZ(m2 _ 4)(ix2 - ~J~l)] problem.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.

SCAN Analysis Code
SCAN is an updated version of the BJSFM composite joint
analysis code. SCAN is an acronym for: Stress Concentrations
ANnalysis. The code was developed by the McDonnell Aircraft
Company from 1985 through 1986 [10,1I]. The code can only
analyze joints connected with one fastener. Improvements have
been made to the BJSFM code, which makes the analysis pro-
cedure closely match the SASCJ analysis. The analysis is based
on anisotropic theory of elasticity, laminated plate theory, and
a boundary collocation procedure. The SCAN and SASCJ analy-
sis formulations are identical until the point where a Laurent
series expansion is assumed for the complex functions +1 and +2.
SCAN uses the following expansions
4,,(zl) = a, in zl + ~ a,,,z?
+2(z2) = a2 In z2 + ~ a2,,z'2'
where a, and a2 are determined by solving Eqs 41 to 44 simul-
taneously. No mapping function for the z coordinates is used in
the SCAN derivation. The constants a~,, and a2,, are determined
by using a least squares boundary collocation technique similar
to the one used in SASCJ. Using SCAN, the user can obtain the
stresses at any point in a plate, given a set of internal and external
boundary conditions.
SCAN is capable of handling joints in a double-lap configu-
ration. The code can analyze a single plate with an unloaded
elliptical hole. SCAN can account for any quadrilateral plate
shape, and bilinear elastic ply behavior is assumed. A limitation
on the dimensions of the quadrilateral plate is that the aspect
ratio of the plate must be less than 2. The code assumes the bolt
bearing load acts in a cosinusoidal distribution over one-half of
the bolt hole. No fastener friction effects are considered in the
code, but their effects on the joint can be approximated. You
can specify a bolt load, axial load, transverse load, and shear
loading. The loads are given in terms of stresses applied to the
plate edges and the bolt hole. SCAN, like BJSFM, considers the
force of the bolt to be just an input force on the hole. Typically
the input loadings, especially the bolt loading, can only be de-
termined experimentally. The user must also know how much
load is transferred through the bolt and how much is bypassed
around the bolt. The failure criteria are checked at a character-
istic distance specified by the user. The failure criteria options
are as follows: maximum strain, maximum stress, Tsai-Hill, mod-
ified Tsai-Wu, and Hoffman. The failure criteria is used at the
ply level.
The SCAN analysis code has many different output options.
The user can print out laminate and ply stresses and strains,
failure criteria, and failure stresses. The analysis does not account
for the actual laminate stacking sequence, and asymmetric lam-
inates cannot be specified. Instead of inputting the stacking se-
quence, the user inputs the percentage of plies for each different
orientation. The code is strictly valid for homogeneous aniso-
tropic flat plates and is assumed to be valid for mid-plane sym-
metric laminates. The user can input stress or displacement
boundary conditions for a plate edge. The boundary conditions
can be input as a constant or as a quadratic distribution over the
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
SNYDER ET AL. ON BOLTED JOINTS ANALYSIS PROGRAMS 47
length of the plate edge. To enforce equilibrium on a loaded
hole joint, the bearing load P must be equal to the edge loading
P,, divided by the plate width w. The user can input up to eight
different ply angular orientations and can have up to three dif-
ferent materials for hybrid laminates. SCAN is a versatile code
for singly fastened composite bolted joints. The code runs rel-
atively fast compared to the SASCJ and SAMCJ codes and has
many output options.
SAMCJ Analysis Code
SAMCJ was also developed by the Northrop Corporation from
1983 to 1985 [12,6]. SAMCJ is an acronym for Strength Analysis
of Multifastener Composite Joints. As the name implies, the
code can analyze joints connected by multiple fasteners. In ad-
(50) dition to this capability, the code can also effectively model a
combination of loaded and unloaded holes and cutouts. SAMCJ
also performs a two-dimensional analysis of finite bolted com-
posite plates. SAMCJ is derived from SASCJ, so the basic analy-
(51) sis is the same. Many identical or slightly modified subroutines
are used for both analysis codes. The main difference is that
SAMCJ uses special finite elements to perform the analysis. The
special finite elements include elements with loaded holes, ele-
ments with unloaded holes, regular plate elements, and beam
elements to model the bolts. The user is required to input the
geometry of the bolted joint, the type of elements, the material
properties, loading condition, and fastener geometry. SAMCJ
applies a 1-kip (4448 N) load to the joint and also applies the
constraints. The code allows the user to take advantage of mul-
tiple elements with similar stiffness matrices to reduce run times.
An average stress failure criteria is used for all joint types in
SAMCJ. The failure criteria determines the joint failure load,
the location of the failure, and the failure mode.
The SAMCJ analysis code has many of the same options as
the SASCJ code. The code is capable of handling multiply fas-
tened joints in a double- or single-lap configuration. The sym-
metry of a double-lap shear problem is taken into account to
reduce the amount of input required and computation time. The
code can not analyze a single plate with an unloaded hole, but
it can analyze joints with only one bolt. A two-dimensional analy-
sis is performed on any finite anisotropic joint. SAMCJ can
account for finite geometries, which include cutouts, nearby free
edges, and tapered or stepped plates. Bilinear elastic ply behavior
is assumed. The code assumes the bolt bearing loads act in a
cosinusoidal distribution. No fastener friction effects are taken
into account, and there is no way to specify a bypass ratio in the
SAMCJ code. The code internally calculates the bolt load dis-
tribution. The edge distance to bolt diameter ratio must be
greater than 3. The plate width to bolt diameter ratio must be
greater than 4. The user can specify a protruding or countersunk
head fastener as in SASCJ. All of the fasteners are assumed to
be made of the same material and are identical in type and size.
The analysis assumes that the fasteners do not fail. The failure
criteria are checked at locations specified by the user. The
SAMCJ analysis code outputs the following joint properties upon
completion of the analysis: failure load, failure mode, joint loads
in the elements, element forces, and an echo of a limited amount
of the input data. Like SASCJ, the code cannot determine
stresses in a joint for a given load. The analysis accounts for the
actual laminate stacking sequence and asymmetric laminates can
48 JOURNALOF COMPOSITESTECHNOLOGY& RESEARCH

be specified. SAMCJ accounts for fastener bending, torque, and
shear. Run times for the analysis can be very long depending on
the number of elements that make up the joint.
Comparisons and Recommended Usage
The authors decided to examine and compare the six composite
bolted joints analysis codes by performing analysis on various
types of joints using as many different codes as possible. We
began by selecting various joint test cases for which data from
actual experimental strength tests already existed. A test pro-
gram of joint geometries, which had already been experimentally
tested in Refs 5 and 8, were compared to the calculations of each
of the bolted joint analysis programs described above. Nine typ-
ical joint geometries were chosen to demonstrate some of the
capabilities and limitations of each code. The assumptions that
were made are as follows: (1) One of the plates being joined
(inner plate for the double lap joints) is made of graphite/epoxy
with the properties shown in Table 1. (2) The outer plate of each
double-lap joint and one plate for single-lap joints is made of
steel with the properties also shown in Table 1. (3) The fasteners
used for each joint are steel bolts with protruding heads. Some
of the fasteners had bushings, but they were not accounted for
in the analyses. (4) The fasteners were assumed to fit exactly,
and no fastener clearance was considered. (5) No fastener torque-
up effects were considered; however it was experimented with
in adjusting the bearing/bypass loads for some of the analysis
codes. (6) For the experimental tests, the average of the failure
loads for each joint geometry is considered to be the actual failure
load for that geometry. (7) All joint loadings are uniaxial. SCAN,
SASCJ, SAMCJ, and BJSFM check for joint failure at a char-
acteristic distance, which is away from the edge of the hole. The
standard distance that was used for this effort was 0.02 in. (0.51
ram). For all joints with bolts that carry a toad, the bypass ratio
plays a role in the definition of the problem. SASCJ requires
the user to input the bypass ratio; SAMCJ, A4EJ, and J O I N T
internally calculate a bypass ratio. The SCAN and BJSFM codes
require that the user know the bolt loading, which in turn implies
the bypass ratio for the joint. For the SASCJ code, the bypass
ratio was adjusted to get a feel for the correct bypass ratio. The
actual bypass ratio is a function of bolt torque and is not accu-
rately known. For the JOINT analysis code, the percentage of
0 ° plies was assumed to be 37% instead of the actual 50% because
of the limitations of the code. Table 2 gives the laminate ply
orientations for the three layups used. The following discussion
gives an explanation of" the results summarized in Table 3.
TABLE 2--Symmetric ply layups.
44-Ply Symmetric Laminate
(45, 02, -45, (0, 45)2, 90, ( - 4 5 , 0, 0, 45, 0, -45)~, 0)s
44-ply layup has
50.0%, 0° plies
22.7%, 45° plies
22.7%, -45 ° plies
4.6%, 90° plies
40-Ply Symmetric Laminate
(45, 02, -45, 90, (0, 45)2, 90, -45, 04, 45, (-45, 0)2)s
20-Ply Symmetric Laminate
(45, 02, -45, 02, 90, -45, 45, 0)s
20- and 40-ply Layups
50.0%, 0° plies
20.0%, 45° plies
20.0%, -45 ° plies
10.0%, 90° plies
Open Hole
BJSFM, SCAN, and SASCJ are capable of analyzing open
holes. The output from all of the analyses is very clos e as shown
in the graph in Fig. 2, even though the composite laminate stack-
ing sequence is not considered in the BJSFM and SCAN codes.
The BJSFM and SCAN codes are quicker, require less, and more
fundamental input data, provide more output data, and are
unique in their capability to analyze biaxial loadings. SCAN is
also the only code capable of analyzing elliptical holes and qua-
dratic loadings, Both the SCAN and SASCJ codes can perform
an analysis for a nonrectangular quadrilateral plate shape. SCAN
or BJSFM are the recommended codes to use if you are analyzing
plates with open holes.
Single Bolt, Double Lap
All of the codes except A4EJ are capable of analyzing double-
lap joints with a single fastener. Actually the JOINT analysis
code is not capable of doing an analysis of a single bolt joint
either because the code assumes an infinite width plate with
uniform bolt spacing through the width of the plate. The JOINT
analysis was included in this section to give the user a feel for
how the capabilities of the code can be stretched.
If the bolt loading is already known from another analysis or
through testing, and stress or strain displacement data are de-
sired, then BJSFM and SCAN are the recommended codes to
use. If the bolt loading is not known, the user can took at trend
data or case studies to get a feel for how the joint is reacting to
varying loading conditions. SASCJ should be used if you simply
want the failure load of the joint for a particular bypass ratio.
The compressively loaded joint shows that SAMCJ tends to pre-
dict an unconservative value for the failure load.

TABLE 1--Material properties.

Graphite Epoxy
E~ = 18.9 x I06 psi
E~ = 18.2 x 106 psi
E~ = 1.9 x 10~ psi
G~2 = 0.85 x 106 psi
v~2 = 0.3
Single Bolt, Single Lap
Steel
JOINT, SASCJ, and SAMCJ are capable of analyzing single-
E = 30.0 × 106 psi lap joints with a single fastener. Again, the J O I N T analysis code
v = 0.3 performs an infinite width plate analysis so the results should be
used with this in mind, The SASCJ and SAMCJ codes run rel-
atively slowly, but they are the only codes capable of performing
an analysis on single-lap joints. SASCJ requires the user to input

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 SNYDER ET AL. ON BOLTED JOINTS ANALYSIS PROGRAMS 49

TABLE 3---Composite bolted Joint problem results',

Cross Actual
Bypass Ratio Predicted Section Predicted Actual Failure
Joint Analysis 0-Full Bearing Failure Area, Failure Failure Failure % Differ- Load,
Type Code 1-Open Hole Load, lbs in. 2 Mode Criteria Mode ences Ibs

OH" SASCJ N/A 27 800 0.431 N/A HTH NS + 10 25 033

OH" SCAN N/A 30 444 0.431 N/A ttTH NS + 18 25 033
OIP BJSFM N/A 24 138 0.431 N/A HTH NS -4 25 033
DL1 b JOINT 0.0 16 753 0.9385 B N/A SO - 22 21 525
DL1 b BJSFM N/A 17 768 0.9385 N/A MS SO - 17 21 525
DL1 b SCAN N/A 28 800 0.9385 N/A MS SO + 25 21 525
DL1 b SASCJ 0.6 19 375 0.9385 B/SO AS SO -10 21 525
DL1 b SAMCJ N/A 20 956 0.9385 B AS SO -3 21 525
DL1C b BJSFM N/A 22 636 0.938 N/A MS B - 10 25 183
DL1C b SCAN N/A 26 100 0.938 N/A MS B +4 25 183
DL1C b SASCJ 0.5 25 595 0.938 SO/B AS B +2 25 183
DLIC b SAMCJ N/A 32 418 0.938 B AS B +22 25 183
SL1 JOINT 0.0 5 072 0.467 TN N/A SO/B - 44 8 980
SLI SASCJ 0.6 9 915 0.467 NS/B AS SO/B +9 8 980
SL1 SAMCJ OK 10 479 0.467 B AS SO/B + 14 8 980
DL2 JOINT 0.0 15 392 0.626 TN N/A SO/B -28 21 475
DL2 SAMCJ N/A 13 660 0.626 B AS SO/B - 36 21 475
DL2C SAMCJ N/A 18 721 0.312 NS AS B + 24 14 165
DL4 JOINT 0.0 15 653 0.521 TN N/A NS -39 25 6t3
DL4 A4EJ N/A 6 786 0.521 N/A N/A NS - 74 25 613
DL4 SAMCJ N/A 14 236 0.521 B AS NS -44 25 613
SL2 SAMCJ N/A 7 120 0.313 B AS SO/B -39 11 640
SL2 JOINT 0.0 4 141 0.313 TN N/A SO/B - 64 11 640
SL4 JOINT 0.0 7 415 0.521 TN N/A SO/B -70 24 963
SL4 A4EJ N/A 6 859 0.521 N/A N/A SO/B -73 24 963
SL4 SAMCJ N/A 14 258 0.521 B AS SO/B -43 24 963

Analysis Codes Failure Criteria Joint Types

1 - JOINT H T H Hoffman/Tsai-Hill
- O H - open hole
2 - A4EJ AS - average Stress DL1 - double-lap 1 bolt
3 BJSFM
- MS - m a x i m u m Stress D L 1 C - double-tap 1 bolt, compression
4 - SCAN SL1 - single-lap I bolt
5 - SASCJ SO - shear out DL2 - double-lap 2 bolts
6 - SAMCJ B - bearing D L 2 C - double-lap 2 bolts, compression
NS - net section D L 4 - double-lap 4 bolts
T N - tension at hole SL2 - single-lap 2 bolts
SL4 single-lap 4 bolts
-

44 ply layup.
b 40 ply layup.
NOTE: all others 20 ply layup. 1 in.: = 6.541 x 10 -~ m% 1 lb = 0.4536/kg.

50O0 a b y p a s s r a t i o o r t o l o o k at a w o r s t - c a s e s i t u a t i o n . S A M C J d o e s
BdGFM ,,,f p t
n o t r e q u i r e t h e u s e r t o i n p u t a b y p a s s r a t i o , a n d it i n t e r n a l l y
-+- S~,SCJ W © = 8
4000 -*. -*- SCaN V,,' r : ' : 8 c a l c u l a t e s this v a l u e . B o t h S A S C J a n d S A M C J d o well at d e -
<
Z
0
O3
3000- /%,. t e r m i n i n g t h e f a i l u r e l o a d if t h e u s e r h a s a g o o d u n d e r s t a n d i n g
o f t h e p r o b l e m a n d t h e j o i n t p a r a m e t e r s . T h e r e is n o c a p a b i l i t y
to o u t p u t s t r e s s e s , s t r a i n s , o r d i s p l a c e m e n t s in t h e S A S C J o r
o
I 20'%@- SAMCJ codes.

IO00- Multiple Bolted Joints

A4EJ, JOINT, and SAMCJ are capable of analyzing multiply
X 0
fastened joints. A4EJ and SAMCJ are capable of accounting for
c o m p r e s s i v e l o a d i n g s . I n all c o d e s , t h e m a g n i t u d e o f t h e e r r o r
1000
20 40 60 80 1O0 120 140 160 t e n d e d to i n c r e a s e as t h e n u m b e r o f f a s t e n e r s i n c r e a s e d . T h i s is
ANGLE (degrees] s h o w n in T a b l e 3 w i t h t h e p r e d i c t e d f a i l u r e l o a d g i v e n in t h e
OPEN HOLE IN TENSION
f o u r t h c o l u m n , a n d t h e a c t u a l f a i l u r e l o a d g i v e n in t h e t e n t h
FIG. 2--Comparison of analysis codes. column. A4EJ has a relatively short run time but can only analyze

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
50 JOURNALOF COMPOSITES TECHNOLOGY & RESEARCH

joints containing at least two rows of fasteners with at least two the amount of output it can produce s o it is r e c o m m e n d e d for
f a s t e n e r s p e r r o w . A 4 E J is r e c o m m e n d e d f o r u s e i n d e s i g n s t u d i e s preliminary design studies. SAMCJ is c a p a b l e o f a n a l y z i n g m a n y
of multiply fastened joints. JOINT has a relatively quick run types of multiply fastened joints because of its finite-element
time, and although the code assumes an infinite width plate, the based formulation.
code produced good results for some cases. JOINT is l i m i t e d i n

TABLE 4~Program capabilities.

Parameter JOINT A4EJ SASCJ SAMCJ BJSFM SCAN

Open Hole x x x x
Single-lap, 1 bolt x x
Double-lap, 1 bolt x x x x
Single-lap, m u l t i a x ×
Double-lap, multi a x x
Cutouts x
Step-lap x x x
Biaxial loadings x x
M u l t i p l e failure c r i t e r i o n x x x x
Finite dimensions x x x a x
D i f f e r e n t bolt t y p e s x x
Compression and tension x x x x x x
T y p e of failure x
T o r q u e - u p effects x x a a
Specific p l a t e l o a d i n g s x x x x x
D i f f e r e n t ply m a t e r i a l s x x x
Different plate materials x x x
Joint optimization x x
Asymmetric laminates x
E l l i p t i c a l bolt h o l e s x

H a s s o m e capability.

TABLE 5--Program required inputs.

Parameter JOINT A4EJ SASCJ SAMCJ BJSFM SCAN

B y p a s s ratio x a a
Plate thickness x x x x a x
Ply o r i e n t a t i o n s x x x x
Stacking sequence x x
Young's modulus, m x x x
Shear modulus, m x x
P o i s s o n ratio, m x x
Young's modulus, c x x x x x
Shear modulus, c x x x x
P o i s s o n ratio, c x x x x
Hole dimension x x x x x x
Plate c o o r d i n a t e s x x x
Plate width a x x x a x
Specific failure c r i t e r i a x x x x
C h a r a c t e r d i s t a n c e s (fail-
ure) x x x x
Material strengths x a x x x
U l t i m a t e strains x a x
Modulus reduction factor a x
Scale factors a
Fastener type x x
Bolt l o c a t i o n s x x x
N u m b e r of f a s t e n e r s a x a x a a
% ply o r i e n t a t i o n s a x x x x
Plate loading x a x x
Bolt l o a d i n g x x
Boundary conditions a x
Bolt l o a d i n g angle x x
Operating temperature a a

° Required with exceptions

NOTE: C is c o m p o s i t e plates, a n d m is m e t a l bolts a n d plates.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 SNYDER ET AL. ON BOLTED JOINTS ANALYSIS PROGRAMS 51

TABLE 6--Program output data.

Parameter JOINT A4EJ SASCJ SAMCJ BJSFM SCAN

Failure load x x x x x x
Stresses at hole boundary a x x
Failure mode x x x
F. E. grid forces x
Margin of safety x
Optimized joint weight x
Optimum joint configuration x
Laminate properties X X X X X
Laminate stresses X X X
Laminate strains X X X X
Circumferential stresses X X
Circumferential strains X X
Radial stresses X X
Radial strains X X
Displacements X X X
Strains per ply a X x
Stresses per ply x X
Failure criteria x x
Echo input data X a X a
Carpet plot data x

" Outputs with exceptions.

Conclusions
As increased emphasis is placed on the design of lighter, faster,
more maneuverable, and less costly aircraft, there will be an
increased emphasis on the reliability and accuracy of composite
bolted joint design methods. In examining the relative merits of
six composite bolted joint design computer codes, some conclu-
sions were drawn. For all of the problems that are run, the user
must check the input data against the problem definition. The
user must also check the output to see that it is consistent and
meaningful. The manner in which most data are input into the
codes makes it easy for errors to occur. Usually, more than one
analysis is necessary to completely solve a problem. The user
must adjust some of the variables and look to see if the solution
is appropriate for the given loadings, bypass ratios, and boundary
conditions. In most cases the analysis codes tended to give con-
servative and, at times, overly conservative results. In general,
most of the codes that were capable of predicting a failure mode
did so correctly. With all of the analysis codes, it should be noted
that only a few load cases were examined in this study and not
all of the capabilities or limitations of the codes were exploited.
A summary of the different programs, capabilities, required in-
puts, and the output data is given in Tables 4, 5, and 6. Accurate
results can be obtained from all of the codes if the user has a
good understanding of the problem and the desired results. In
all cases, several different analysis methods should be used to
confirm all results. With the increased application of composites
that are arising, work in the area of composite joint analysis
should continue.
References
[1] Venkayya, V. B., Ramkumar, R. L., Tischler, V. A., Snyder,
B. D., and Burns, J. G., "'Recent Studies on Bolted Joints in Com-
posite Structures," 64th AGARD SMP Meeting, Madrid, Spain,
April 1987.
[2] Ramkumar, R. L., Saether, E. S., and Tossavainen, E., "Design,
Fabrication Testing and Analysis of Bolted Structural Elements,"
AFWAL-TR-86-3033, 1986.
[3] Smith, M. K., Hart-Smith, L. J., and Dietz, C. G., "Interactive
Composite Joint Design," AFWAL-TR-78-38, Parts 1, 2, and 3,
April 1978.
[4] Hart-Smith, L. J., "Design Methodology for Bonded-Bolted Com-
posite Joints," AFWAL-TR-81-3154, Vols. I and II, Feb. 1982.
[5] Ramkumar, R. L., et al., "Strength Analysis of Composite and
Metallic Plates Bolted Together by a Single Fastener," AFWAL-
TR-85-3064, Aug. 1985.
[6] Ramkumar, R. L., Saether, E. S., and Cheng, D., "Design Guide
for Bolted Joints in Composite Structures," AFWAL-TR-86-3035,
March 1986.
[7] Garbo, S. P. and Ogonowski, J. M., "Effect of Variances and
Manufacturing Tolerances on the Design Strength and Life of Me-
chanically Fastened Composite Joints," AFFDL-TR-78-179, 1978.
[8] Garbo, S. P. and Ogonowski, J. M., "Effect of Variances and
Manufacturing Tolerances on the Design Strength and Life of Me-
chanically Fastened Composite Joints," Vols. I, II, and III,
AFWAL-TR-81-3041, April 1981.
[9] Whitney, J. M. and Nuismer, R. J., "Stress Fracture Criteria for
Laminated Composites Containing Stress Concentrations," Journal
of Composite Materials', Vol. 8, July 1974.
[10] Hoehn, G., "Enhanced Analysis/Design Methodology Develop-
ment for High Load Joints and Attachments for Composite Struc-
tures," NADC-87011-60, Nov. 1986.
[11] Buchanan, D. L., Ogonowski, J. M., and Reiling, H. E., Jr., "De-
velopment of High Load Joints and Attachments for Composite
Wing Structures," NADC-86007-60, Nov. 1985.
[I2] Ramkumar, R. L., Saether, E. S., and Appa, K., "Strength Analy-
sis of Laminated and Metallic Plates Bolted Together By Many
Fasteners," AFWAL-TR-86-3034, 1986.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Apr 6 22:06:25 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Ecole Technologie Superieure pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.