ICAMB 2012, Jan 9-11, 2012

SMBS, VIT University, Vellore, India

678


AbstractThis paper presents the response of aircraft fuselage
panel to the cabin pressure by idealizing the structure as a flat
stiffened panel. The principal stresses developed in the fuselage
due to the pressure difference at the altitude during the actual flight
conditions were simulated by using the commercial FEA software
MSC.PATRAN & MSC.NASTRAN. The response of structure for
the hoop stress and longitudinal stress developed in the fuselage
due to cabin pressurization is studied by using finite element
analysis technique. Emphasis was given to study the response of I,
C and L types of the stringers for the load bearing capacity of the
aircraft structure and comparison for the structural responses of
stiffened panel was made between these types of stringers. From
the analysis it was found that; I and C type of stringers have least
deflection than L type; which is an important parameter for the
safe design of the aircraft structure.

Keywords Stiffened panel, cabin pressure, hoop and
longitudinal stresses.
I. INTRODUCTION
stiffened panel is a generic representative structural element
of an airframe. Fuselage is typically a curved stiffened panel
construction in which different types of stresses are
developed due to the cabin pressurization [1]. The internal forces
acting on a section of fuselage due to cabin pressurization are
necessary to be calculated to predict the structural stability during
actual operating conditions. The internal forces due to longitudinal
and hoop stress developed in the fuselage act on fuselage section in
biaxial directions and subject the stiffened panel to tensile forces in
perpendicular directions. The force due to hoop stress acts in a
direction parallel to bulkhead and force due to longitudinal stress
acts in the direction parallel to stringer. Finite element analysis is
widely used [2] to understand the response of the structure to such
types of loads and it is quite interesting to study different
alternative geometrical shape of stringers cross-sections that can be
used in advanced aircraft designing of structural panels. It is
important to represent the necessary structural features in the finite
element model to get the correct response of the structure for a
given loading condition. Conventional methods of representing the
structure in FE Model lead to inappropriate stress distribution and
incorrect identification of critical locations [2]. Appropriate FE
modeling techniques was used to represent the details of the
stiffened panel [3].

Achyutha Krishna Rao K was the passed out B. Tech. student (2011) of
SMBS, VIT University, Vellore- 632014, India. (e-mail:
achyuthakrishnaraok2007@vit.ac.in).
Akash Mohanty is working as the Assistant Professor (Selection Grade),
Design Division, School of Mechanical and Building Sciences, VIT
University, Vellore, India. (Mobile No: +91-8903309241; fax: 0416
2243092; (e-mail: mohanty@vit.ac.in).
Shiva Rama Krishna A was the passed out B. Tech. student (2011) of
SMBS, VIT University, Vellore- 632014, India. (e-mail:
shivaadika@gmail.com).
In this paper the response of geometrical shape of the stringer
cross-section over the bulk material properties of the fuselage
stiffened panel was studied. Three types of geometrical shape such
as I, C and L type of stringers were chosen for the load bearing
capacity of the aircraft structure and the comparison was made to
study the structural responses of stiffened panel for these types of
stringers. The structural deflection for cabin pressurization and
stresses developed in the fuselage due to cabin pressurization for
each type of stringers was simulated. MSC.PATRAN was used as
a pre & post processor and MSC.NASTRAN was used as a solver
for this analysis.
II. IDEALISATION OF STIFFENED PANEL
The curved panel of the fuselage (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2) is
idealized as flat panel. Ralph et al. simulated the modal
response of fuselage panel by idealizing it as flat stiffened
panel and correlated the results with experiments [4]. A
similar approach was followed for fuselage panels subjected
to cabin pressurization. The hoop stress and longitudinal
stress [5] developed in the fuselage produce the tensile loads
on the stiffened panel in circumferential and longitudinal
direction respectively. Thus the equivalent tensile force due
to hoop stress and longitudinal stress acting on the stiffened
panel are calculated by multiplying the cross-section area of
the stiffened panel in the circumferential and longitudinal
directions respectively. The equivalent tensile forces
obtained are applied to the stiffened panel to simulate the
response due to cabin pressurization.

A. Geometry of stiffened panels


Fig. 1 Components of stiffened panel


Finite Element Modeling And Analysis Of
Fuselage Stiffened Panel Subjected To Cabin
Pressurization
Achyutha Krishna Rao K, Akash Mohanty and Shiva Rama Krishna A
A
1) Skin
2) Stringer
3) Bulkhead
4) Mousehole
ICAMB 2012, Jan 9-11, 2012
SMBS, VIT University, Vellore, India

679



Fig. 2 Dimensions of stiffened panel

B. Mouse holes
The mouse holes were the openings in bulkhead to facilitate
passing of stringers. The Fig. 3 shows a detailed view of the
mouse hole for L and C stringer.



Fig. 3: (a) L Stringer, (b) C Stringer
III. ASSUMPTIONS MADE FOR FEA
As the fuselage panel was idealized to a flat stiffened panel,
certain assumptions [6] were made to simulate the actual
behavior of fuselage stiffened panel. Considering a sample
portion of pressurized fuselage, it was analyzed that the
small portion was subjected to tensile forces in both the
directions by surrounding fuselage panels. Thus the
following assumptions were made for analysis.
(a) The bulkhead and stringers were subjected to uni-axial
membrane stress
(b) Skin was assumed to be in the state of plane stress
condition.
IV. FINITE ELEMENT MODELING
An appropriate finite element analysis was used to
represent necessary structural details to obtain correct
structural behavior of stiffened panel. Lynch et al. [3] shows
the finite element modeling procedure for the post buckling
analysis of conventional riveted fuselage panels. The results
from different modeling approaches were compared with
test results. In this analysis [3], 1-D bar elements were used
to represent rivet joint, which has strong correlation with the
test results has been selected for modeling.
One dimensional Bar2 [7][10] elements are used to
represent the rivet joints which act as connectors between
the skin and the stringers and between skin and bulk-head.
Two dimensional QUAD4 [8] elements were used for the
analysis of the skin, stringer and bulkhead.
V. LOADS ACTING ON STIFFENED PANEL DUE TO CABIN
PRESSURIZATION
Two types of stresses are developed in the fuselage due to
cabin pressurization [1, 5].

A. Circumferential Stress (Hoop Stress)
Hoop stress (1) was developed in circumferential
direction which is equivalent to tensile stress due to
equivalent tensile force in that direction.




P =Cabin differential pressure =6 psi =0.00422 kg/mm
2

r =Radius of the fuselage =59 inches =1498.6 mm
t =Thickness of the Stiffened plate =1.75 mm
Hoop stress=3.6137 kg/mm
2


Force on stiffened panel due to hoop stress
=(Hoop stress x Area of cross section)
= ) 75 . 1 1500 6137 . 3 ( =9486.138 kg

As the skin was represented by 2-D finite element, the force
per unit length of stiffened panel replicates the force on
stiffened panel due to hoop stress.

Load per unit length =
1500
138 . 9486
=6.324 kg/mm
B. Longitudinal Stress
Longitudinal stresses (2) were developed in fuselage axial
direction which is equivalent to stress due to equivalent
tensile force in the axial direction.



Longitudinal stress =1.80685 kg /mm
2


Force on stiffened panel due to longitudinal stress
=Longitudinal stress x Area of cross section
75 . 1 900 80685 . 1 = =2845.788 kg

As the skin was idealized as 2-D finite element, the force
per unit length of stiffened panel replicates the force on
stiffened panel due to hoop stress.

Load per unit length =2845.788/900 =3.16198 kg/mm.

VI. BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
Response of stiffened panel due to bi-axial loading was
simulated using PATRAN/NASTRAN. All the skin nodes
were constrained in Y direction to simulate plane stress. The
Hoop stress=
t
r P
... (1)
Longitudinal stress
t
r P
2

= ..
(2)
ICAMB 2012, Jan 9-11, 2012
SMBS, VIT University, Vellore, India

680

node at geometric centre of the skin was constrained in all
the 6 degrees of freedom to accommodate application of bi-
axial load on the stiffened panel. This analysis was done for
constraining one side of the stiffened panel and applying
load on the opposite side to facilitates the loading in a single
direction i.e. either hoop stress or longitudinal stress can be
simulated, which would lead to inappropriate response of
the stiffened panel. A uniformly distributed load was
applied to the edges of stiffened panel. The force was
applied uniformly on the edges of skin, bulkhead and
stringer.
VII. MATERIAL PROPERTIES
The Aluminum alloy (Al 2024) which is the commonly used
materials for the aircraft structural parts [11] was considered
for fuselage analysis. The Table 1 shows the material
properties which was used for the FEA analysis.
TABLE 1: Material properties of Al 2024
Modulus of Elasticity (E) 72GPa
Poissons ratio () 0.33
VIII. METHODOLOGY
The value of hoop stress and longitudinal stress and
equivalent tensile load on the stiffened panel due to hoop
stress and longitudinal stress was calculated. Necessary
structural details necessary for the finite element modeling
was obtained from the solid model of stiffened panel. Care
was taken in meshing the stiffened panel, stringer and
bulkhead to obtain nodes at the riveted hole centre thereby
facilitating the representation of rivet as one-dimensional
finite element connecting the center point of hole. The gap
between skin-bulkhead and skin- stringer was not filled by
gap elements [3] because the results show no effect due to
gap elements. As the skin and stringers are represented by
2-dimensional finite elements, the equivalent tensile load in
kg/mm was calculated. Appropriate finite element modeling
techniques for representing necessary structural details of
the stiffened panel was identified [3]. The loads and
boundary conditions were applied to the finite element
model. Structural response of stiffened panel for various
stringers was simulated using PATRAN/NASTRAN. A
comparison was made between different types of stringers
and graph plotted to show variation of maximum
deformation for different types of stringers.
IX. RESULTS
Fig. 4 shows the finite element analysis to obtain the
deformation values of C-Stringer Stiffened panel due to the
cabin pressurization. From this analysis, the maximum
displacement was found to be 0.254 mm at the edges as in a
fuselage panel in bi-directional tension mode due to the
forces acted upon by the surrounding fuselage panels and
minimum displacement was found to be 1.45 x 10
-3
mm at
the geometric center of stiffened panel.


Fig. 4 Deformation of C-Stringer Stiffened panel

von-Mises stress is the equivalent stress which was
independent of direction and the value can be compared
with tensile strength from the tensile test. For the given set
of loading condition the von-Mises stress was found and the
maximum value 15.1 kg/mm
2
was observed at mouse hole
and the minimum value of 2.81x10
-2
kg/mm
2
was observed
in stringers which do not have any discontinuities as shown
in fig. 5.


Fig. 5 von Mises stress of C-Stringer Stiffened panel

Fig. 6 shows the finite element analysis to obtain the
deformation values of L-Stringer Stiffened panel due to the
cabin pressurization. From this analysis, the maximum
displacement was found to be 0.282 mm at the edges as in a
fuselage panel which is in bi-directional tension due to
forces acted upon by the surrounding fuselage panels and
minimum displacement was found to be -0.282mm at the
geometric center of stiffened panel.



Fig. 6 Deformation of L-Stringer Stiffened Panel

For the given set of loading condition; the von Mises stress
was found and the maximum value 15.1 kg/mm
2
was
observed at mouse hole and the minimum value of 2.70x10
-2

kg/mm
2
was observed uniformly in stringers (Fig. 7).
ICAMB 2012, Jan 9-11, 2012
SMBS, VIT University, Vellore, India

681


Fig. 7 von Mises stress of L-Stringer Stiffened Panel

Fig. 8 shows the finite element analysis to obtain the
deformation values of I-Stringer Stiffened panel due to the
cabin pressurization. From this analysis, the maximum
displacement was found to be 0.254 mm at the edges as in a
fuselage panel of bi directional tension mode. This was due
to forces acted upon by the surrounding fuselage panels and
minimum displacement was found to be 0 mm at the
geometric center of stiffened panel.



Fig. 8 Deformation of I-Stringer Stiffened Panel

For the given set of loading condition the von Mises stress
was found and the maximum value 15.1 kg/mm
2
was
observed at mouse hole and the minimum value of 2.81x10
-2

kg/mm
2
was observed in stringers which do not have any
discontinuities as shown in fig. 9.



Fig. 9 von-Mises stress of I-Stringer Stiffened Panel

From the analysis it was observed that the maximum value
of von Mises stress was found to be same for all the three
cases. It was attributed to the presence of mouse hole in the
bulkhead which takes the hoop stress and the stringers have
no part in taking the hoop stress. Effect of stringers on the
maximum displacement was evident as the stringers
contribute in taking the forces due to longitudinal stress
developed in the fuselage. Fig. 10 shows the maximum
displacement of the stiffened panel for I, C and L stringer.
The equal value of maximum displacement for I and C
stiffeners was attributed to the equal area of cross section.
The steep increase in the value of maximum displacement
was due to cross-section area which is less as compared to I
and C stringers.
X. CONCLUSIONS
The work presented herein contributes to the design and
analysis of aircraft fuselage panels subjected to cabin
pressurization. This work focused on idealized fuselage
stiffened panels subjected to equivalent biaxial tension force
on stiffened panel due to hoop stress and longitudinal stress.
Maximum deformations for stiffened panels with I, C, L
stringers was determined. Significant difference in the
maximum deformation was noted between different
stringers. The maximum stress value was same for all the
stiffened panels as the stringers do not contribute in taking
the hoop stress. It was observed that the stiffened panel with
I and C stringers have least maximum displacement than L
types of stringers. Further work can be undertaken to
perform fatigue analysis on stiffened panel to study the
effect of cabin pressurization at different altitudes.



Fig. 10 Maximum deformation for stiffened panels with I, L and C
stringer
REFERENCES
[1] Niu, Michael. C. Y. 1999. Airframe Stress Analysis and Sizing,
2
nd
Edition. Hong Kong Conmilit Press Ltd, Hong Kong, chap 3
[2] Rao, Singiresu. S. 2004. The Finite Element Method in
Engineering, 4
th
Edition. Elsevier Science & Technology Books.
[3] Lynch, C.; Murphy, A., Price. M., Gibson, A. 2004. The
computational post buckling analysis of fuselage stiffened
panels loaded in compression. J ournal of Thin-Walled
Structures, Vol. 42, pp. 14451464.
[4] Ralph D. Buehrle, Gary A. Fleming, Richard S. Pappa,
Ferdinand W. Grosveld. 2002. Finite Element model
development and validation for aircraft fuselage structures. 18th
International Modal Analysis Conference.
[5] Mott, R. L. 2002. Applied Strength of Materials, 2
nd
Edition.
Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi.
[6] Boeing Design Manual: Finite Element Modeling Guide for
Aircraft Structural Analysis. 1989.
[7] Patran Reference Manual Part 3: Finite Element Modelling,
2010. MSC.Software, v2010.
[8] MSC.Patran, MSC.Nastran Preference Guide Volume 1:
Structural Analysis. 2010. MSC.Software, v2010.
[9] Sreejit Raghu. 2010. Finite Element Modelling Techniques in
MSC.NASTRAN and LS/DYNA.
[10] Linear Static Analysis Users Guide. 2003. MSC.Nastran.
[11] Megson, T. H. G. 2003. Aircraft Structures for engineering
students, 3
rd
Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann.