User: unknown  ||   Login  ||  NEWS: Vibration Fatigue Analysis, Nov 14-16, Long Live Ukraine!, Join FABER
	Introduction This experimental campaign was performed in our department at the CTU in Prague on samples from Aircraft Industries company. These were originally manufactured by Acorn Welding to serve for component tests of welded joints for the project of a new engine bed for L 410 NG airplane. The project was abandoned, however. We proposed to test the samples in our lab under the condition that the test output will be free for any publication. The results should primarily serve as an experimental basis for diploma and PhD theses in our department, but thanks to their open-access character their wide sharing in other projects is enabled. Jan Papuga Conditions of Use In case you decide to use these data items for any your publication, you agree to refer to the original paper, where they are first used: Machač, M.; Papuga, J.; Doubrava, K.; Fišer, J.: Fatigue Analysis of Thin-Walled Welded Hollow Section Joints. In: Fatigue and Fracture of Materials and Structures. Structural Integrity, Vol. 24, Cham, Springer 2022, pp. 49-55.   Weldments Intended use: Component tests for a new engine bed for L 410 NG airplane Samples manufactured on request of: Aircraft Industries, a.s. I-specimen: component, head 1, head 2, central section H-specimen: component, chords, brace, lug, pin Setup of the Experimental Campaign Tests performed at: Dept. of Mechanics, Biomechanics and Mechatronics, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague Test operators: Ivona Vízková (H-specimens), Martin Machač and Karel Doubrava (I-specimens) Testing machine: Amsler HFP422 Load ratio: R=0.1 Test frequencies: I-specimen 130 Hz, H-specimen 75-90 Hz Failure definition: Frequency decrease by 5 Hz Experimental Results H-specimen, R=0.1, f=75-90 Hz Sample Stress amplitude [MPa] Mean stress [MPa] Number of cycles [-] Defectoscopy H13 83.4 101.9 25799 1D: Incomplete penetrations 7.5 + 1.5 mm 2C: Pore 1.0 x 0.3 mm H07 83.6 102.2 29613 1D: Pore 1.0 mm H01 78.5 95.9 37890 Between 2D and 2B: Row of pores 1.2 x 1.5 mm close to 2A: Pore 2 x 0.4 mm H11 67.9 83.0 41522 1D: Pore 2.1 mm close to 1B: row of pores 2.5 x 0.2 mm 1A: Tungsten 0.7 x 0.5 mm H09 73.3 89.6 69752 1D: Pore 1.0 mm 1C: Pore 0.4 mm 2C: Pore 2.6 mm H06 62.8 76.7 103827 2C: Pore 0.8 mm H14 57.6 70.4 166913 1C: Incomplete penetrations 1.5 + 1.5 mm 2C: Pore 1.3 x 0.6 mm H04 41.9 51.2 169279 1D: Incomplete penetration 8 mm close to 2C: Pore 1.2 mm H10 41.9 51.2 491391 H08 52.4 64.0 497085 1D: Pore 0.5 mm 1C: Incomplete penetration 5mm 2D: Incomplete penetration 2.5 mm H05 36.7 44.8 1027905 1D: Incomplete penetration 4 mm 2C: Pore 0.8 mm H02 47.2 57.7 1124261 H03 36.7 44.8 11231398 close to 1C: Pore 1.1 mm close to 2C: Pore 1.0 mm H12 31.4 38.4 16734416 I-specimen, R=0.1, f=130 Hz Sample Stress amplitude [MPa] Mean stress [MPa] Number of cycles [-] Defectoscopy T04 284.0 347.0 5817 T11 260.7 318.6 7403 T08 240.1 293.4 11105 T06 195.9 239.4 20779 Pore 0.7 mm T07 218.5 267.0 22961 T05 173.3 211.8 31770 Pore 2.2 x 0.5 mm T10 173.5 212.0 129927 T02 120.7 147.5 198555 Tungsten particle 0.7mm T12 150.9 184.4 270663 T09 135.8 165.9 431158 T03 120.7 147.5 836446 T01 113.2 138.3 1264937 papuga@pragtic.com	Development in 2011-2014 supported by: