Design and Analysis of Buckling-Critical Large-Scale Sandwich Composite Cylindrical Test Articles
It has long been established in the literature that the buckling response of thin-shell structures can be very sensitive to the presence of small geometric and loading imperfections. The Shell Buckling Knockdown Factor Project (SBKF) was established by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) to develop analysis-based shell buckling design recommendations for stiffened-metallic and composite launch-vehicle shell structures. Large-scale buckling tests were used to validate the modeling and analysis methods applied in developing these analysis-based recommendations. Herein, the test article design methodology for 8-ft-diameter, honeycomb-core sandwich composite cylinder validation tests is discussed and cylinder designs are presented. In this methodology, first, the sandwich composite design space was defined using several nondimensional parameters, and the desired test article design space was determined by examining the designs of launch-vehicle cylinder structures. Essentially all test article designs within certain design parameters were generated and then downselected based on simple closed-form failure calculations and the nondimensional design-space parameters. Four of these designs that spanned a significant portion of the design space of interest and had global buckling as the first predicted failure mode were selected and subjected to higher-fidelity finite element analyses (FEAs): shell-element-based analyses, axisymmetric-element-based analyses, and global-local analyses. The analysis flow discussed in this report supported the design objective. As the analysis flow progressed, designs were downselected so the fidelity of the analysis methods, and consequently their computational cost and accuracy, was increased. The selection of the FEA types created an analysis framework where particular methods complemented each other and reduced the uncertainty of the predicted test article responses. The analysis results are illustrated using several designs when the computationally expeditious closed-form analysis stage is discussed. Once this stage is complete, the higher-fidelity FEA types are illustrated using one selected detailed test article design. Both perfect and imperfect test article geometries were considered.