AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY

MID-CONTINENT AIRPORT
WICHITA, KS 67277
REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA
Revision (A)
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF FUSELAGE FRAMES
AND WING CARRY-THRU STRUCTURE
ON RAYTHEON/BEECH BONANZA TYPE AIRPLANES
PREPARED BY:
J.B. DWERLKOTTE ASSOCIATES, INC.
429 N. ST. FRANCIS
WICHITA, KANSAS
DATE: September 15,2004
REVISED: October 13, 2004
/?
WRITTEN BY:
~
~
y
+
~1I1..l2~
CHECKED BY:
-'1
1/
APPROVED BY:
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 1

1.0 Introduction:

The purpose of this report is to analyze the reason or reasons
for the continued Fuselage Frames cracking problems at the Front
Wing Spar Carry-Thru Structure of the Raytheon/Beech Bonanza type
airplane models as identified in Raytheon Service Bulletin
SB 53-2360 Rev.(1) and the twin engine series Raytheon/Beech
Travel Air/Baron models as identified in Raytheon Service
Bulletin SB 53-2269.


1.1 Description:

The Single Engine Bonanza type airplanes are Type Certificated
under (2) FAA Type Certificates, (1) A-777 for Models 35 thru
G35 and including Model 35R and (2) 3A15 for Models 35-33 thru
B36TC. All models in the A-777 group have Gross Weight
limitations of 2850 lbs or less and all models in the 3A15
group have Gross Weights of 2900 lbs and up except the Model E33C
which uses a G.W. of 2800 lbs while operating in the Acrobatic
Category. All Models under the T.C.s listed above are Type
Certificated in the Utility Category of CAR Part 03 and CAR
Part 3 respectively.

The Twin Engine Models 95 thru 58A Airplanes are all Type
Certificated per T.C. 3A16 in the Normal Category of CAR Part 3
and the various models have Gross Weight limitations of 4000 lbs
to 5990 lbs.

The Raytheon Service Bulletins only apply to those Models listed
in T.C.s 3A15 and 3A16.

The above overview of the airplane models and the comparative
gross weights and size of the airplanes that use the same basic
wing, fuselage, and landing gear structure is provided here to
give the reader a picture of similarity and small differences in
loadings that occur from model to model in the review for Fatigue
problems in this analysis and discussion.

The Single Engine Bonanza Series of Airplanes are Type
Certificated in the Utility Category and are required, by the FAA
Regulations, to meet the Structural Limit Load Factor of 4.4gs,
and the Twin Engine Series are Type Certificated in the Normal
Category and are required to meet the Structural Limit Load
Factor of not less 3.8gs, nobody flies at these load factors on
purpose except in Acrobatics. Almost all flying is done at load
factors of less than 2.0gs, therefore, the fatigue load factor
range that is usually used and we will use in this analysis is
from a minimum of 0.7gs to a maximum of 2.0gs. These load
factors apply to both Flight and Landings. Any continuous flying
at more than 1.5gs becomes very uncomfortable to most
passengers.
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 2
1.1 Description (cont):

It is important at this point for the reader to realize that the
limit load factors of 4.4g's and 3.8g's respectively for the
Single Engine and Twin Engine Airplanes represent the loads to
which Beech Aircraft Corp. (Raytheon) was required by the FAA to
demonstrate loading of the aircraft structure and hold the load
on the structure for an indefinite period of time after which the
load is removed and the structure returns to its original
position without permanent set to any parts. No failures of
parts is permitted at less than the Ultimate load factors of
6.6g's and 5.7g's respectively.

Some persons such as Mr. Dick Wilson in his website
"http://mysite.verizon.net" imply that the bulkheads are cracked
due to high 4.4g loads. His whole analysis is based on these
high "g's" which never exist except in an extreme emergency. In
the real world no one flies or lands at the maximum limit load
factors unless the pilot is at near emergency conditions in
either flight or landing or both.

Mr. Wilson's report never gets into any specific fatigue problem
areas and the specific loads or range of loads that may be
causing the cracks. We feel that he wants someone else to do the
work for him as is indicated by his letters to Mr. Eual Conditt
in the FAA ACO, Structures Section. Mr. Conditt did a very good
job, in his April 12, 2004 letter, of showing the extent of the
data that it takes to present and get approved an alternate means
of compliance to the method presently approved for Raytheon and
also it is the applicant that has the burden of supplying the
supporting data.

Fatigue Problems are due to stresses and deflections caused by
day to day flying at lower operating loads in the 0.7g to 2.0g
range that are in effect working the material in the structural
parts either continuously or intermittently depending on whether
the loads are caused by smooth or rough air in flight or certain
landing condition loads on the main and nose gears.

Any cracking in the fuselage frames is usually not a safety of
flight item because the "Carry-Thru" structure, front spar and
rear spar, together with the wings are complete structures
without the fuselage frames being attached, however, the fuselage
is not complete without attachment to the carry-thru structures
for transfer of the fuselage loads into the wings. In these
attachments, some of the wing differential shear loads will carry
across in the frame webs. If fatigue cracks occur in the
fuselage frames they should be repaired and not be allowed to
remain forever. In addition, the cause of the crack's "input
loads" should be positively determined so the repairs that are
made will cure the problem and are not just an interim fix.
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 3
1.1 Description (cont):

For the above reasons, we propose that either flight testing with
strain gauges placed at predetermined critical locations and or
finite element model testing as proposed in the following
sections of this report should be implemented. The object of the
testing is to find the "input loads" that are causing the frame
webs and flanges to crack by fatigue.

The Raytheon Service Bulletins allow that the first inspections
for fatigue cracks is at 1500 flight hours as they determined
from their customer service feed back. This shows that the loads
are probably of a low magnitude but locally concentrated in the
bulkhead web and skin flange area and it is highly unlikely that
these are coming in from the wing thru the carry-thru attach
fittings because these are all high magnitude loads and would not
act like they are relieved after the bulkhead web cracks locally.

As many of the service reports state, after the first cracks are
found by inspection, subsequent inspections do not show a
continuation of cracking at those locations. High magnitude
loads in the area of cracks will always cause the cracks to grow
unless reinforcements are installed to reduce the stresses and/or
redirect the loads in the various parts.

Understand that all loads in the airplane are continuous
regardless of magnitude, therefore, if the structure in front of
a load cracks, it finds another way around that crack.
Therefore, the cracks in the bulkhead frame web and flange radius
did not eliminate the load that caused the crack it just went
around a different route in the structure. From this I think you
can visualize that the loads have to be small to find a new path
around the cracked location and the stress has been reduced
sufficiently so that the cracked part does not continue to crack.
For the above reasons, the loads causing the cracking that
stopped have to be small but concentrated and the stress in the
material in the localized area is in the fatigue range for the
material.

Figures (1A) and (1B) are scanned views from Beechcraft drawing
36-4004 Rev.(E) for information purposes to the reader only.

The Current Repair Kit is divided basically into (4) Kits, (1)
for each corner of the Carry-Thru Structure. Each Kit will take
care of and cover the cracks in the web locally, however, all of
the Kits are designed to reinforce the frames for vertical and
inboard/outboard loads but they do very little for fore/aft loads
which are the loads that caused the cracks in most of the
photographs that we have seen. See paragraph 3.0 Analysis in
this report for additional review.

AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 4
























































Figure (1A)
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 5
























































Figure (1B)
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 6
2.0 References:

Drawings, (Beech):

36-4004 Rev.(E), Kit Information-Front Spar Carry Thru Structure
Reinforcement. (For Single Engine Airplanes)

58-4008 Rev.( ), Kit Information-Front Spar carry Thru Structure
Reinforcement. (For Twin Engine Airplanes)

Documents:

FAA AD 95-04-03, Beech Aircraft Corporation, Amendment 39-9155
(Bonanza type Single Engine Airplanes).

Raytheon Service Bulletin: SB 53-2360 Rev.(1), Fuselage-Wing
Forward Spar Carry-Thru Structure Inspection
and/or Reinforcement.

FAA AD 90-08-14, Beech Aircraft Corporation,
(Small Beech Twin Engine Airplanes).

Raytheon Service Bulletin: SB 53-2269 Rev.( ), Fuselage-Wing
Forward Spar Carry-Thru Structure Inspection
And /or Reinforcement.

Raytheon Beechcraft Bonanza Series Maintenance Manuals.


Photographs And Field Reports:

American Bonanza Society Questionnaire Responses List
(Updated 8/31/04)

Photographs supplied to A.B.S. by its Members of Cracks that
occurred on their Airplanes.


Technical Documents:

MIL-HDBK-5H Metallic Materials and Elements
for Aerospace Vehicle Structures

Formulas for Stress and Strain by R.J. Roark & W.C. Young

Report: AFS-120-73-2 Fatigue Evaluation of Wing and Associated
Structure on Small Airplanes
By: FAA Engineering and Manufacturing Division
Airframe Branch.
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 7
3.0 Analysis:

The purpose of this analysis is to try to determine, from the
location and type of cracks in the fuselage frames attached to
the Wing Carry-Thru Structure, where the loads causing the cracks
are coming from and why they are located at nearly the same
quadrants on the fuselage frame in each case reported by the
Field mechanics and inspectors

The documented data in the American Bonanza Society Questionnaire
Response List and the Photographs taken by the members and by the
mechanics on location in the Field show that the primary origin
of cracks is in the lower RH and LH corners of the fuselage
frames near the lower RH and LH wing carry-thru fittings, which
is also consistent with the Raytheon/Beech findings and the
repairs by their Repair Kits shown on their drawings 36-4004 and
58-4008.

The Beech Kits provide a repair that reinforces the bulkhead to
skin attach flange and the bulkhead web locally where the web
cracks are found near the lower fuselage to wing front spar
fitting. The cracks are found alternately in the forward and aft
bulkhead frames, therefore, Raytheon made Kits for each of the
four corners of the Carry-Thru Structure to repair only those
areas where the cracks appear. Each Kit will take care of and
cover the cracks in the web locally, however, all of the Kits are
designed to reinforce the frames for vertical and inboard/outbd
loads but none of the Kits take care of stopping the cracking due
to any fore/aft input loads. The areas of the frame flanges
attached to the fuselage skin and doublers at the cutouts for the
carry-thru fittings is very vulnerable to concentrated fatigue
loads.

A review of the photographs of the cracks found in the field and
a study of the Raytheon/Beech drawing shows that most of the
cracks in the bulkhead frames and the general center of the
Raytheon repairs are centered on the lower front spar fittings,
which passes thru an approx. 3.0 x 3.0 hole in the fuselage
skin and skin doubler. In addition the fuselage skin corner J
stringer is centered directly on the cutout providing a highly
stiffened area in the skin locally that realizes fore/aft loads
from rudder loads, unequal landing loads both main and nose gear
and other side inertia loads that must be reacted around the
cutouts in the fuselage skin. These loads do not have a good
direct load path around the fitting cutouts and must, therefore,
be bridged around the fittings by the fuselage frame flanges and
fuselage skin and doublers.

It has come to our attention that the 0.032 thick fuselage skin
and 0.040 thick area doubler, all of 2024-T42; reference
Beechcraft Bonanza Series Maintenance Manuals, may not be
sufficient structure in all operating environments to carry the
above named loads, that are gathered into the corner J
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 8
3.0 Analysis (cont):

stringer, around the carry-thru fittings pass-thru cutouts
without slight deflections that result in passing some of the
load into the bulkhead flanges attached to the skin and doublers
resulting in fore/aft loads in the bulkhead web corners for which
the bulkhead webs were not designed and the result is that the
bulkhead web takes a finite number of cycles and then cracks.

We have provided a brief analysis, to show that even small loads
with the structure not fully stiffened to carry the loads around
the cutouts will cause small repeated deflections that result in
fatigue cracks. See Appendix (A) to this report for the analysis
and see Appendix (B) for the photographs.

The concerns outlined by Peter Harradine after his calculations
in Appendix (A) of this report are concerns that need more
attention by Raytheon Aircraft Services so the problems do not
reappear after the Kits have been installed.

The above concerns about cutouts in the fuselage skins are faced
everyday in the design of pressure vessel cutouts for antennas
and various other equipment on pressurized fuselages.

Both upper and lower carry-thru fitting skin cutouts should be
reviewed if any upgrading of the Kits is considered because
cracks in the radius of the fuselage frame have also been found
at the upper carry-thru fitting above the area covered by the
Raytheon Kits.

AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 9
4.0 Conclusion:

The Raytheon/Beechcraft repair Kits reinforce the webs of the
Fuselage Frames at the locations where the cracks have been
occurring, however, we do not see that the Kits provide a
permanent repair unless a set of doublers are installed on the
outside of the fuselage skin to redirect the fore/aft loads
around the cutouts so the fuselage frame flanges do not have to
bridge the loads. The skin doublers should be installed on both
sides of the fuselage regardless of whether one or four of the
other Raytheon Kits are installed.

It is our considered opinion that a finite element model should
be made of the Fuselage, from the Rear Spar Carry-Thru forward to
the Nose Landing Gear Attachment points, and the Wing, from the
Landing Gear Attachment points in the RH and LH wings. Because
of the similarity of the Single Engine and Twin Engine Airplanes
in these areas, the application of various loading conditions to
the same F.E. model will show where critical deflections occur.
There should be no need for more than one F.E. model. The F.E.
Model would not require finite detail of structure except in
suspect areas of excess deflections. The F.E. Model should be
designed with the cooperation of Raytheon to obtain good input
loads, however, this is not a mandatory item.

AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 10







Appendix 'A'

Simplistic Deflection Analysis & Assessment of Web Stresses.

by Peter Harradine, Aircraft Engineering Consultant


AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 11
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 12
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 13
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 14
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 15
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 16







Appendix 'B'

Photographs provided by Field Service and Repair Facilities.









AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 17


Stringer

(RH Front Bulkhead Looking Aft)
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 18


(RH Front Bulkhead Looking Aft)
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 19

Cracks Stringer

(RH Front Bulkhead Looking Aft)
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 20


Stringer Crack

(RH Front Bulkhead Looking Aft)
AMERICAN BONANZA SOCIETY.
REV. (A) REPORT NO. ABS36-4004SA PAGE NO. 21

Stringer Crack







(RH Front Bulkhead Looking Aft)