POSTTEST EXAMINATIONS

After the tests were completed, the panels were removed from the FASTER test fixture and nondestructive inspections were performed throughout the test section, with particular emphasis on the lap joint. Comprehensive fractographic examinations of the rivets in the panel test sections were then undertaken to reconstruct growth history and to determine the final state of damage and the quality of the lap joint installation.

Sections of the lap joint in the test sections were removed following the procedure described by Ramakrishnan and Jury [3.1]. They were removed using a circular metal cutting saw. It was ensured that the saw cuts were made about 1″ above and 1″ below the 3 rows of the lap joint fasteners. The rivet labels were vibro-etched on the free surfaces of the inner and outer skins, with an ‘UP’ and‘AFT’, indicating the direction of the aircraft's crown. In the case where there was a long lead crack, the rivets along the lower rivet row of the lap joint were largely free as a result of fatigue cracks. Precision saw cuts were then made using a vertical band saw in order to prepare specimens that contained crack surfaces. In the cases where there was no lead crack, coupons of 1″ width with centers at each lower row rivet hole were marked up. The tops of the coupons were marked up at about 0.5″ from the hole center. Fastener tail diameters, as installed, in the hoop and longitudinal directions were measured using a calibrated dial caliper, to be used for study of rivet installation.

Stereomicroscope photographs between 10X to 15X magnification of the fasteners' tails were taken in the three positions: Normal, from above at about 40⁰; and from below at about 40⁰. The photographs were taken using the Leica MZ6 Stereomicroscope, Figure 3.29. The Leica MZ6 can inspect unprepared samples virtually

at any axes and angles, with a good 3D effect. The stereomicroscope is interfaced with a computer for image analysis and digital archiving of images. In taking the photographs, attention was paid to the free surface of the inner skin adjacent to the rivet tail, for the presence of cracks. Any through-the-thickness crack in the inner skin would be visible from this surface.

Figure 3.29. Leica MZ6 stereomicroscope

To expose the fracture surfaces for subsequent fractographic examinations under the scanning electron microscope, a dremel hand tool was used to cut slots (0.035" wide) through the inner and outer skin stack-up of the coupon. Vee cuts were made in the coupons' upper quadrant, as illustrated in Figure 3.30(a), and the rivet released by pushing it out through the opening created. With this approach, the rivets remained relatively intact when they were removed, which enabled measurement of the rivet's bucked tail diameter and height. A schematic of a driven rivet, defining the bucked tail diameter and height is shown in Figure 3.31. These measurements were compared with the manufacturer’s specifications to determine whether the rivets were driven to

specifications. The skin around the hole in the lower 240⁰ sector also remained undamaged, which was important for the measurement of crack positions around the holes. The lower 240⁰ sectors of the coupons were then soaked in Citrus Burst™ (d-Limonene/Ester) for about 3 days to soften the faying surface sealant between the inner skin and the doubler. The two layers were then separated by inserting a knife along the joint line. The faying surfaces were then cleaned with additional solvent (Citrus Burst™) and examined for cracks and other defects such as fretting under the stereomicroscope.

Saw cut line

Crack Saw cut (a) 1-inch square coupon around rivet (b) Faying Surface of Inner Skin

Outer skin

Inner skin

Remaining ligament

Figure 3.30. Schematic of specimen preparation for fractography

Bucked tail Countersunk head

Bucked tail diameter

Bucked tail height

Figure 3.31. Schematic of a driven rivet, showing the countersunk head and the bucked tail

The crack surfaces were then exposed to facilitate crack length measurements and fractographic analysis under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). To expose the cracks, a slit was first made using a dremel wheel in the inner skin up to about 0.05″ from the crack tip, Figure 3.30 (b). The sample was then cooled in liquid nitrogen, after which the ligament between the crack and the slot was broken open by applying tension and a moment about the crack face. The cracks were then viewed under both the stereomicroscope and the SEM. The crack surfaces were first cleaned with acetone for about two minutes in an ultrasonic cleaner. This was followed by cleaning in M-Prep Conditioner A, a water-based acidic cleaner made by Vishay Micro-Measurements. The specimens were then ultrasonically cleaned for about two minutes in M-Prep Neutralizer A, a water-based alkaline cleaner to prevent chemical etching of the fracture surfaces. As a final step, the specimens were cleaned in distilled water.

The majority of the fracture surfaces were found to be covered up with some foreign substance, which covered up the marker bands, even after using the cleaning procedure described above, which had been used successfully by Ahmed et al. [3.5] to clean fracture surfaces in Al 20243-T3 alloy lap joint specimens. The cleaning procedure of Ramakrishnan [3.1] was also used without success. The first step in this method employs acetone, followed by a dilute solution of Turco Liquid Smut Go^TM. Turco Liquid Smut Go^TM is a deoxidizer and de-smutter, and its active ingredients are nitric and hydrofluoric acid. The sample was cleaned for three minutes in the solution that was one part Smut Go^TM and six parts water by volume, with no success.

In an effort to identify the elemental composition of the foreign substances on the fracture surfaces, energy dispersive x-ray (EDAX) analyses were conducted using a

Phillips XL 30 SEM. Al 2024, which is the aluminum alloy used to make the fuselage skin is primarily an Al-Cu-Mg alloy. The chemical composition limits of Al 2024 are given in Table 3.6 and were obtained from reference [3.24]. The EDAX was conducted on one of the fracture surfaces of A24 and A40, at magnifications between 500X to 1000X. Table 3.7 shows sample EDAX composition results of the dominant four elements taken at four different locations on the fracture surface of A24. As shown in the table, the element with the highest percentage by weight at all four locations was aluminum, followed by oxygen. This finding reinforced the suspicion that the substance covering up the fracture surfaces was corrosion (aluminum oxide). In recognizing the oxide nature of the deposits, a more concentrated solution of Turco Liquid Smut Go^TM deoxidizer was used to clean the fracture surfaces of rivet A22. Although this approach removed the corrosion deposits, the corrosion had left deep pits all over the surface.

Neither striations nor marker bands were visible on either of the two cracks in this sample. Wanhill and Schra [3.25] tested crack growth specimens of 2024-T3 and 7475-T761 aluminum alloys in sump water, and also found “substantial buildup of corrosion deposits on the fracture surfaces.”

Table 3.6. Elemental composition of Al 2024 alloy [3.24]

Composition Limits Element

(% wt.)

Silicon 0.5 Iron 0.5 Copper 38-4.9 Manganese 0.30-0.9 Magnesium 1.2-1.8 Chromium 0.1 Zinc 0.25 Titanium 0.15 Others 0.15 Aluminum Balance

Table 3.7. EDAX results for fracture surface of A24

Percent Weight Element

Location 1 Location 2 Location 3 Location 4 Oxygen 18.1 22.0 19.1 15.7

Magnesium 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.6

Aluminum 74.0 72.8 73.5 78.1 Cupper 4.0 3.6 3.6 3.5

A Philips XL30 field emission environmental scanning electron microscope (FEESEM) was used to examine the fracture surfaces at selected rivet holes. The XL30, shown in Figure 3.32, is a computer driven, high vacuum (10-7 Torr) microscope with a spatial resolution of about 1.75 nm. The imaging modes include backscarttered electron imaging and secondary electron imaging. Secondary electron imaging was used for fracture surface examination owing to its high topographical contrast.

Figure 3.32. Phillips XL30 environmental scanning electron microscope

To map marker band locations, the procedure described by Willard [3.26] was followed. Using a local Cartesian x-y coordinate system, an origin was chosen at a reference point that could easily be identified. Where marker bands were present, points

along each marker band were recorded relative to the origin to characterize its location and shape. The points were then plotted in a two-dimensional space, and used to determine the subsurface crack sizes, shapes, and crack growth rates.

To study the joint quality and to qualitatively evaluate differences in rivet installation quality between the lap joint on the right hand side (4R) and the left hand side (4L) of the airplane, selected coupons with the critical row of rivets still installed were inspected, as illustrated by the schematic of Figure 3.33 . The coupons were sectioned, mounted, polished and etched for high magnification examination. Grinding and polishing were carried out using a Buehler PowerPro 4000 variable speed grider/polisher.

Polishing was done in five minute increments at 150 rpm using a polycrystalline diamond suspension solution. The final particle size of the polishing solution was 1 micron.

Outer skin

Inner skin

Rivet

Figure 3.33. Schematic of a cross-section of an as-installed rivet, inspected to determine the joint quality

After the samples were etched, an Olympus PMG-3 optical microscope was used to examine the surfaces. The PMG-3, Figure 3.34, has a Polaroid 35 mm camera and allows digital archiving of the micrographs. The optical microscope is interfaced with a computer for image analysis and digital archiving of images.

Figure 3.34. Olympus PMG-3 optical metallograph