LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Li, Dezhi; Han, Li; Thornton, Martin; Shergold, Mike (2012)
Publisher: Elsevier Science BV
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: TL, TA
Self-piercing riveting (SPR) is one of the main joining methods for lightweight aluminium automotive body structures due to its advantages. In order to further optimise the structure design and reduce the weight but without compromising strength, reduction of redundant materials in the joint flange area can be considered. For this reason, the influence of rivet to sheet edge distance on the fatigue strengths of self-piercing riveted joints was studied. Five edge distances, 5 mm, 6 mm, 8 mm, 11.5 mm and 14.5 mm, were considered. The results showed that the SPR joints studied in this research had high fatigue resistance and all specimens failed in sheet material along joint buttons or next to rivet heads. For lap shear fatigue tests, specimens failed in the bottom sheet at low load amplitudes and in the top sheet at high load amplitudes except for specimens with very short edge distance of 5 and 6 mm; whereas, for coach-peel fatigue tests, all specimens failed in the top sheet. For both lap shear and coach-peel fatigue tests, specimens with an edge distance of 11.5 mm had the best fatigue resistance. It was found that for coach-peel fatigue, length of crack developing path before specimens lost their strengths was the main factor that determined the fatigue life of different specimens; for lap shear fatigue, the level of stress concentration and subsequent crack initiation time was the main factor that determined the fatigue life.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • [1] A.R. Krause, A.R.A. Chernenkoff, SAE World Congress 1995. Paper no. 950710.
    • [2] G.S. Booth et al., SAE World Congress 2000. Paper no. 2000-01-2681.
    • [3] M. Zhou, S.J. Hu, H. Zhang, Weld. Res. Suppl. (1999) 305s-313s.
    • [4] H. Yang, et al., Mater. Design 29 (2008) 1679-1684.
    • [5] D. Li, et al., Mater. Design 34 (2012) 22-31.
    • [6] C.P. Fung, J. Smart. Proc. IMech. G 211 (1997) 13-27.
    • [7] L. Han, A. Chrysanthou, K.W. Young, Mater. Design 28 (2007) 2024-2033.
    • [8] S. Kalluri, G.R. Halford, M.A. McGaw, Technical Memorandum 106881, 1995, NASA.
    • [9] Y.K. Chen, et al., Wear 255 (2003) 1463-1470.
    • [10] L. Han, A. Chrysanthou, J.M. O'Sullivan, Mater. Design 27 (2006) 200-208.
    • [11] N.E. Fleck, C.S. Shin, R.A. Smith, Eng. Fract. Mech. 21 (1985) 173-185.
    • [12] L.P. Pook, Metal Fatigue: What it is, Why it matters?, Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 2007.
    • [13] A.H. Cottrell, Theory of Crystal Dislocations, Blackie and Son, London, 1964.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article