MATEC Web of Conferences 129, 02040 (2017)

DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201712902040
ICMTMTE 2017

Structure determination and composite wing spar stress-strain

state estimation
Pavel Solovyev1, Andrey Gomzin1,*, Yuriy Pervushin2, Fanil Musin1 , and Sergey Galyshew1
1
FSBEE USATU, Department of Materials Science and Physics of Metals, 450008, Ufa, Russia
2
FSBEE USATU, Department of Materials Resistance, 450008, Ufa, Russia

Abstract. The paper presents the results of studies on the stress-strain state of composite wing spars with
different lay-up structures. The object of research is a U-shaped cross-section composite wing spar. On the
basis of the analysis of the stress-strain state, the most favorable structure of a wing spar from the viewpoint
of minimizing the risk of stress state and providing the highest stiffness. Recommendations are given on lay-
up structure stacking (compared with typical structures) for more effective perception of external loads by a
wing spar.

1 Introduction on the variants of composite materials structures,

depending on the purpose of a load-bearing element and
Currently there is a clear tendency in the world practice of loads acting on it.
aircraft building to increase the share of composite In practice, usually the following typical structures are
materials in airframes construction. This tendency is due used in composite structures: unidirectional (Fig. 2.а); bi-
to the fact that composite materials have the best set of directional (Fig. 2.b); three-layer structure (Fig. 2.с);
physical and mechanical properties, especially high quasi-isotropic structure (Fig. 2.d).
specific strength and stiffness characteristics, high long-
term strength, low sensitivity to stress concentrators.
Extension of application areas of composites is
conditioned by their introduction in design of airframe
load-bearing elements. (a) (b)
Use of composite materials in load-bearing airplane
elements (Fig. 1.b) allows making a fuselage and wings
(Fig. 1.a) not only light and strong, but also to decrease
assembly time by reducing the number of assembly units,
while increasing reliability of a design. (c) (d)

Fig. 2. Typical lay-up structures for products from composite

materials.

For example, in certain world scientific sources [1] the

opinion prevails that it is most convenient to design
laminated composites using layered cells. These cells
consist of several layers oriented at no more than four
(a) (b) different angles and repeated the required number of times
to reach a needed thickness of composite. However, this
Fig. 1. Cross-section of an aircraft wing with a longitudinal set approach does not allow designers to obtain maximum
of wing spars (а) and several profiles types of airframe load- efficiency of those composites.
bearing elements (b). So, the major disadvantage of such typical structures
A significant feature of composite materials is the is that they do not take into account individual loading
ability to vary a composite structure to obtain the highest features of specific elements.
properties in those directions in which a product is Therefore, typical structures are rarely used for multi-
exposed to maximum loads. However, calculation of load products, as a rule, without making any changes.
composite materials products is a complicated and All of the above-mentioned makes it urgent to
laborious problem. determine typical and individual structures of major load-
The solution of a similar problem could be bearing elements of an aircraft (spars, stringers, ribs,
significantly simplified, if there were reference databases
*
Corresponding author: [email protected]

© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
MATEC Web of Conferences 129, 02040 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201712902040
ICMTMTE 2017

frames), that provide favorable perception of an external The physical and mechanical characteristics of the
load field. composite unidirectional layer are calculated by the
method considered in [2, 3] and are presented below.
The unidirectional composite elastic characteristics at
2 Research goals and objectives the standard temperature t = 20°C: E 11 = 127.7 GPa; E 22
= 6.2 GPa; E 33 = 6.2 GPa; G 12 = 4.3 GPa; G 13 = 4.3 GPa;
The purpose of this research is to establish the patterns for G 23 = 1.56 GPa; ν 12 = 0.226; ρ = 1.5 g/cm3.
choosing basic typical composite structures for the design The unidirectional composite strength characteristics
and manufacture of aircraft fuselage load-bearing
at the standard temperature t =20 °C: 𝜎𝜎𝜎𝜎�11р= 1.4 GPa; 𝜎𝜎𝜎𝜎�11с=
elements, depending on their stress-strain state.
To achieve this goal, the following tasks are solved in this 0.95 GPa; 𝜎𝜎𝜎𝜎�22р= 93.1 MPa; 𝜎𝜎𝜎𝜎�22с= 93.1 MPa; 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏̅12 = 52.4
study: MPa.
1. Analysis of the stress-strain state of a spar with a U- The geometrical parameters of a spar: height h=100
shaped section; mm, width b=40 mm, length l=1 m.
2. Choice of a typical layer stacking structure of a spar The initial layers stacking structure of the composite
made from composite material, providing a favorable spar is (0°) n . The direction of the main coordinate system
stress state and deformation behavior; is along the longitudinal axis of the spar. The number of
3. Practical recommendations on the choice of rational layers is n=13. The thickness of one layer is h c =2 mm.
structures for aircraft load-bearing elements. The boundary conditions: fixed support on one of the
tips, pressure p = 10 kPa, uniformly distributed over the
lower flange of the spar. These boundary conditions are
3 Computing experiment chosen on the basis of the analysis of force factors acting
on the real wing spars of an aircraft.
A spar with a U-shaped cross-section is chosen to perform
this experiment. The real force factors acting on the spar
element are shown in Fig. 3. 3.2 Simulation of loading of the unidirectional
structure spar
The composite spar is simulated in the ANSYS software
using the ANSYS Composite Prepost module. The
number of model elements is about 26,000.
Figure 4 displays the spar deformation caused by the
above-mentioned force factors. The figure shows that
under the bending loads, the spar not only bends, but also
twists.
Figure 5 shows the distribution of the safety factor for
the composite spar.
The RF safety factor is determined in accordance with
the selected strength criterion – in this case the Mises-Hill
criterion, which is widely used to assess the risk of the
stressed state in the layers of the composite material
during the ply strength analysis [4,5] – using the formula:

−1
Fig. 3. Spar loading scheme. =RF (=
IRF )
−1
( H cr ) =
The spar flanges operate in the tension/compression −1
mode induced by the bending moment, and the spar web  2 2 2 (1)
  σ1  σ1σ 2 σ  τ 
takes up shearing forces. = − +  2  +  12  
 X XY 
    Y   S  
3.1 Initial data  

The modeled spar material in this research is carbon fiber where X, Y и S – the ultimate stresses in the conditions of
reinforced plastic based on a carbon ribbon and a uniaxial loading of the unidirectional layer in the direction
polyimide matrix. parallel and perpendicular to the fibers and under the shear
Carbon ribbon: density ρ = 1.7 g/cm3; tensile strength in the plane of the layer, respectively, σ 1 , σ 2 , τ 12 – the
𝜎𝜎𝜎𝜎�в1= 2750 MPa; elastic modulus along fibers E в1 = 210
+ acting stresses in the direction of the principal axes of
GPa; elastic modulus across fibers E в2 = 8 MPa, Poisson elasticity of the unidirectional layer.
ratio ν в12 = 0,15. The graph demonstrates that the minimum value of the
Polyimide matrix: density ρ = 1.2 g/cm3; tensile safety factor is determined in the most loaded element and
strength 𝜎𝜎𝜎𝜎�м+ = 114 MPa; elastic modulus E м = 4.2 GPa; is equal to RF min = 11.06. In general, the spar strength is
Poisson ratio ν м = 0.3. ensured for the given loads.

2
MATEC Web of Conferences 129, 02040 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201712902040
ICMTMTE 2017

(a)
Fig. 6. Distribution of normal stresses (along fibers) σ 1 in the
spar layer №1 oriented at an angle 0о (MPa).

Fig. 7. Distribution of normal stresses (along fibers) σ 1 in the

spar layer № 13 oriented at an angle 0о (MPa).

(b)

Fig. 4. Deformation of the spar under the action of specified

loads

Fig. 8. Distribution of normal stresses (across fibers) σ 2 in the

spar layer №1 oriented at an angle 0о (MPa).

Fig. 5. Distribution of the safety factor for the composite spar

By analyzing the distribution of the reserve factors,

one can conclude that the most loaded are the outer layers
with numbers №1 and №13.
Figures 6-11 show the stresses in two outer layers of
the spar oriented at an angle 0°. The green arrows in the Fig. 9. Distribution of normal stresses (across fibers) σ 2 in the
figures show the directions of fiber orientation. spar layer №13 oriented at an angle 0о (MPa).

3
MATEC Web of Conferences 129, 02040 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201712902040
ICMTMTE 2017

if the first fraction is maximum, then the most riskful are

the normal stresses along the fibers, if the second one is
maximum – then the riskful stresses act across the fibers,
if the third one is maximum – then riskful stresses are
tangential ones in the layer plane.
In the studied case:
For layer №1

σ 31.7 σ
= 1 = 2.3%; = 2 2.75
= 3%;
X 1400 Y 93.1
τ 1.42
=12 = 2.7%;
S 52.4
Fig. 10. Distribution of shear stresses in ply plane τ 12 in the
spar layer №1 oriented at an angle 0о (MPa). For layer №13 (3)

σ 26.7 σ 4.26
= 1 = 1.9%; = 2 −= 4.5%;
X 1400 Y −93.1
τ 1.32
=12 = 2.5%;
S 52.4
The analysis of the graphs and formulas (2) indicates
that the prevailing stresses in the most stressed layers are
the stresses across the fibers σ 2 . In this regard, for a more
favorable perception of the external loads field, it is
recommended to add reinforcement in this direction.

Fig. 11. Distribution of shear stresses in ply plane τ 12 in the 3.3 Modeling of spar loading with typical
spar layer №13 oriented at an angle 0о (MPa). structures
Fig. 12 displays the distribution of stresses and Other typical structures of the spar are considered, and
safety factors in the most loaded element over all layers their influence on its stressed state and deformation
and the distribution of the elastic properties of the layered behavior are estimated.
element as a function of direction. The results of the finite element modeling of the
considered structures are given below:
1. (0°) 13 : deflection U Y = 2.16 mm; twist angle
φ = 7.08o; RF lay=1 = 20.5; RF lay=13 = 11.06;
σ 1 lay=1 = 31.7 MPa; σ 1 lay=13 = 26.7 MPa;
τ 12 σ 2 lay=1 = 2.8 MPa; σ 2 lay=13 = - 4.3 MPa;
σ1 RF τ 12 lay=1 = 1.42 MPa; τ 12 lay=13 = 1.32 MPa;
2. (0°/90°) 3 /0°/(90/0) 3 : deflection U Y = 3.53 mm; twist
angle φ = 9.19o; RF lay=13 = 12.77; RF lay=12 = 20;
σ 1 lay=13 = 0.2 MPa; σ 1 lay=12 = -14.5 MPa;
σ 2 lay=13 = -1.7 MPa; σ 2 lay=12 = - 0.2 MPa;
τ 12 lay=13 = 3.2 MPa; τ 12 lay=12 = -2.3 MPa;
σ2 3. (0°/45°/-45°) 2 /0°/(-45°/45°/0°) 2 : deflection U Y = 2.98
mm; twist angle φ = 7.14o; RF lay=12 = 10.88;
RF lay=11 = 11.3; σ 1 lay=12 = 10.4 MPa; σ 1 lay=11 = -13.6 MPa;
σ 2 lay=12 = -1.1 MPa; σ 2 lay=11 = 0.5 MPa;
τ 12 lay=12 = -4.6 MPa; τ 12 lay=11 = 4.2 MPa;
Fig. 12. Distribution of stresses, safety factors and elastic 4. (0°/45°/90°/-45°) 3 / 0°: deflection U Y = 3.34 mm; twist
properties in the most loaded element. angle φ = 7.50o; RF lay=1 = 11.66; RF lay=5 = 12.1;
σ 1 lay=1 = -73.2 MPa; σ 1 lay=5 = -70.8 MPa;
In order to determine which of the stresses acting in σ 2 lay=1 = 0.2 MPa; σ 2 lay=5 = -0.3 MPa;
the unidirectional layer are the most riskful, it is necessary τ 12 lay=1 = -0.47 MPa; τ 12 lay=5 = -0.2 MPa.
to find the maximum of the following expressions It is clear from the above-written that the most
entering into the Hill criterion: favorable structure for the spar from the viewpoint of
ensuring the minimal deformations (both deflections and
σ σ τ  twisting of the free tip) is a unidirectional structure with
max  1 ; 2 ; 12  (2)
 X Y S  the parameters:

((0°) n , φ = 7.08°). From the standpoint of the stressed state
risk, the most preferable structure is the mutually

4
MATEC Web of Conferences 129, 02040 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201712902040
ICMTMTE 2017

orthogonally reinforced structure (0°/90°) 3 /0°/(90/0) 3

(RF min =12.77). In general, under the given loads, any
structure satisfies the composite spar strength condition.
The permissible safety factor for composite products [RF]
= 2.0 ÷ 3.0.

4 Conclusion
During the finite element modeling of the U-shaped
composite wing spar on the basis of the carbon ribbon and
the polyimide matrix, the main regularities of the spar
stacking structure effect on its stressed state and elastic
deformation behavior have been revealed.
The most favorable typical structure from the
viewpoint of the load-bearing element rigidity is a
unidirectional structure (0°) n . However, from the
standpoint of the stress state risk, the preferred structure
is the one with (0°/90°) m /0°/(0°/90°) m . In general, the
strength of the spar under the specified loads is ensured.
For more favorable perception the external loads field
while maintaining high stiffness of the spar, it is
recommended to establish 20-30% of layers reinforced at
an angle of 90° or close to it in the unidirectional structure.

References
1. R.M. Jones, Mechanics of Composite Materials
(Taylor&Francis, 1999)
2. V.S. Zhernakov, Y. S. Pervushin, P. V. Solovyev,
Vestnik UGATU 19 №3 (69), 139-149 (2015)
3. Y.S. Pervushin, V.S. Zhernakov, Fundamentals of
mechanics, design and manufacturing technology of
items from layered composite materials: teaching
guide (USATU, Ufa, 2008)
4. C. Herakovich, Non-elastic properties of composite
materials (Mechanics, Moscow, 1978)
5. L. Brautman, R. Crock, Composite materials:
Mechanics of composite materials (Mashinostroenie,
Moscow, 1978)