Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available
Available online
online at www.sciencedirect.com
at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Procedia
Procedia Engineering
Engineering 19900 (2017)
(2017) 000–000
954–959
Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

X International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2017

X International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2017
Finite
Finite element
element modeling
modeling for
for structural
structural dynamic
dynamic analysis
analysis of
of bolted
bolted
joints under uncertainty
joints under uncertainty
a,1 a b a
P.
P. Langer
Langera,1 ,, K.
K. Sepahvand
Sepahvanda ,, C.
C. Guist
Guistb ,, S.
S. Marburg
Marburga
a Chair of Vibroacoustics of Vehicles and Machines, Technical University of Munich, 85748 Garching, Germany
a Chair of Vibroacoustics ofb BMW
Vehicles and Machines, Technical University of Germany
Munich, 85748 Garching, Germany
Group, Knorrstraße 147, 80788 Munich,
b BMW Group, Knorrstraße 147, 80788 Munich, Germany

Abstract
Abstract
Bolted joint components have a major impact on the dynamic behavior of structural systems. They exhibit various uncertainties
Bolted joint components have a major impact on the dynamic behavior of structural systems. They exhibit various uncertainties
associated with joint materials, contact conditions, geometric parameters, clamping forces, the chosen pressure distribution, etc.
associated with joint materials, contact conditions, geometric parameters, clamping forces, the chosen pressure distribution, etc.
Consequently, predicting the structural dynamic behavior of such components employing numerical models such as finite element
Consequently, predicting the structural dynamic behavior of such components employing numerical models such as finite element
(FE) method is an extremely challenging issue. This paper focuses on the critical points concerning the FE modeling for structural
(FE) method is an extremely challenging issue. This paper focuses on the critical points concerning the FE modeling for structural
dynamic analysis of bolted connections to achieving reasonably accurate simulation results. In this regard, sample components
dynamic analysis of bolted connections to achieving reasonably accurate simulation results. In this regard, sample components
of an automotive engine transmission system with bolted joints are investigated. Experimental modal analysis via laser Doppler
of an automotive engine transmission system with bolted joints are investigated. Experimental modal analysis via laser Doppler
vibrometry is used to estimate the natural frequencies of the components under uncertainty in pressure distribution, excitation
vibrometry is used to estimate the natural frequencies of the components under uncertainty in pressure distribution, excitation
amplitude and clamping lengths. The FE model is then updated to achieve a reasonable accuracy in dynamic responses compared
amplitude and clamping lengths. The FE model is then updated to achieve a reasonable accuracy in dynamic responses compared
to experimental results.
to
c experimental results.
 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
©c 2017
2017 The
TheAuthors.
Authors.Published
Published byElsevier
ElsevierLtd.
Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibilityby

of the organizing committee of EURODYN 2017.
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of EURODYN
EURODYN 2017. 2017.
Keywords: dynamic of bolted joints, uncertainty quantification, experimental modal analysis, finite element modeling, experimental validation
Keywords: dynamic of bolted joints, uncertainty quantification, experimental modal analysis, finite element modeling, experimental validation

1. Introduction
1. Introduction
Bolted assemblies are widely disseminated throughout the industry. The design of such joints influences the entire
Bolted assemblies are widely disseminated throughout the industry. The design of such joints influences the entire
structural behaviors owing the fact that they can be exposed to different regimes of loading conditions depending to the
structural behaviors owing the fact that they can be exposed to different regimes of loading conditions depending to the
pre-tensions, friction and thermal conditions, assembly configurations, local deformations, etc. The global stiffness of
pre-tensions, friction and thermal conditions, assembly configurations, local deformations, etc. The global stiffness of
the structure is accordingly affected from these conditions due to introduced flexibility by the joints. Furthermore, the
the structure is accordingly affected from these conditions due to introduced flexibility by the joints. Furthermore, the
behavior of bolted-joints under dynamic loading is still not fully understood. The most efforts done by the available
behavior of bolted-joints under dynamic loading is still not fully understood. The most efforts done by the available
analytical models limited to simple configurations and linear cases, see [1,2] for instance. It is common that numer-
analytical models limited to simple configurations and linear cases, see [1,2] for instance. It is common that numer-
ical models for structures made of such assemblies exhibit large number of degrees of freedom, nonlinear behavior,
ical models for structures made of such assemblies exhibit large number of degrees of freedom, nonlinear behavior,
uncertainty and very expensive in terms of computational time. Including all these effects in a single computational
uncertainty and very expensive in terms of computational time. Including all these effects in a single computational

1 Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 (89) 289 – 55124

1 Corresponding
E-mail address:author. Tel.: +49 (89) 289 – 55124
p.langer@tum.de
E-mail address: p.langer@tum.de

1877-7058 c 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1877-7058 c 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-reviewunder responsibility of the organizing committee of EURODYN 2017.
1877-7058 © 2017responsibility
Peer-review under The Authors. Published
of the by committee
organizing Elsevier Ltd.
of EURODYN 2017.
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of EURODYN 2017.
10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.199
 P. Langer et al. / Procedia Engineering 199 (2017) 954–959 955
2 P. Langer / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

model is almost impossible. To limit the reasonable simulation time, or even make calculation possible, the nonlin-
earities are linearized and built into the finite element models as much as possible [3,4]. Investigations on the impact
of the bolted joints of the dynamic behaviors of structure have been considered in several works, cf. [5,6]. However,
bolted components are very sensitive to small variation and uncertainty in parameters which influences the quality of
the structure behavior. This has been investigated in numerous researches using various stochastic methods based on
the sampling and non-sampling techniques to combine the associated uncertainties with the FE method, cf. [7,8] and
references therein.
The purpose of this paper is to present an assessment of the role of accurate FE model for bolted joints considering
uncertainties in the dynamic behavior, particularly in the natural frequencies. Many studies have been performed to
investigate the impact of joint stiffness and damping properties into the structural dynamic behaviors [9,10]. The
attempts to consider these effects on the natural frequencies of the structures are mostly limited to experimental
investigations, see for instance [11]. Accurate prediction of the natural frequencies of such assemblies is difficult
due to the highly non linear behavior of the contact area. For that reason, a linear model for bolted-joint stiffness
suitable for the FE method is proposed considering associated uncertainties. The major issue in this regard is to
how one attempt to model the pressure cone under the bolted joints. As indicated in [12], the most relevant, often
interdependent and influencing factors on the half apex angle of the pressure cone and the clamped member stiffness
are the joint material, surface and contact properties, geometry, clamping force, pressure distribution, and the specific
joint configuration. In this work, a combination of experimental and numerical techniques are performed to identify
the more reliable pressure distribution zone under the bolted joints. This leads an effective modeling of the joint
stiffnesses in the FEM model. The application of the proposed method is applied to finding the natural frequencies
of the engine assembly of a typical vehicle. This paper starts by description analytical methods for calculating the
fastener and member stiffness of bolted structures in the next section, followed by their application to a simplified
engine-transmission-system FE model. The results include investigations into pressure distribution in the contact area
and comparison of the experimental modal analysis and simulations. The conclusions are given in the last section of
the paper.

2. Analytical methods

2.1. Member stiffness

When two members are joined by a bolt, a tensile preload is applied to the latter. The members now lie under initial
compression. This initial compression keeps the joint members in contact and plays a part in bearing external loads to
which the joint is subject [13]. Total joint stiffness is the sum of member and fastener stiffnesses because the bolt and
members act as two springs in parallel. Analytically calculated member stiffness is not the same as contact or interface
stiffness, because analytical methods assume perfectly flat, smooth surfaces. Resistance to surface penetration reaches
its maximum immediately and not depend on the surface distance and roughness. Member stiffness merely represents
the additional stiffness brought into the system by the members’ initial compression.
Nawras et al. [13] provided an analytical model for fully and partially developed pressure cones. The stress
distribution was approximated with a third order polynomial. Finite element method was performed for some ge-
ometries and an analytical pressure cone angle of 36 degrees was estimated from a comparison of the results with
those of the analytical model. The model accuracy was also validated with an experimental set-up and the associated
load-deflection data. The authors stated the maximum absolute percentage errors to be 2.69 % compared to finite ele-
ment analysis results and 14.69 % compared to experimental data. For symmetric problems, they calculated member
stiffness to be:

Pe 0.5πE tan ϕ
km = =  (3γ+7)(D−d)  10(l tan(ϕ)−D+γd) (1)
δ 1
d ln (3D+7d)(γ−1) + (3D+7d)(D−d)
956 P. Langer et al. / Procedia Engineering 199 (2017) 954–959
P. Langer / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000 3

for partially developed pressure cones, where Pe , δ, ϕ, D, d, l and γ are an external load, the member overall deflection,
the half-apex angle, the outer diameter of cylindrical joint, the hole diameter, the clamping length and the relative
diameter of bolt head, respectively. For fully developed joints, Eq. (1) can be given as
Pe 0.5πdE tan ϕ
km = =  (3γ+7)(l tan(ϕ)+γd−d)  . (2)
δ ln (γ−1)(3l tan(ϕ)+3γd+7d)

In the present study, Nawras’ et al. [13] models given by Eqs. (1) and (2) will be used because it offers the most
accurate results and an adapted version of it not elaborated further here can be applied to problems with asymmetrical
member thicknesses.
Marshall’s et al. results [14] are described the joint interface pressure to the radial distance from a bolt hole edge.
The curve fit to their experimental data and the integration of the corresponding analytical function shows that the
inner 40% of the contact area experience around 65% of the clamping force, whereas the remaining outer 60% of
the contact area are subjected to only 35% of the clamping force. Regarding the relationship of contact pressure to
contact stiffness, Bittner [15] lays out a description of normal contact’s nonlinear behavior based on research done by
Kragelski [16] and Geisler [17].

2.2. Fastener stiffness

The bolt threaded and unthreaded portions within the grip length act as two springs in series [18]. The combined
bolt stiffness, kb , then can be calculated as
Ad At E
kb = (3)
Ad lt + At ld
in which E represents the elastic Young’s modulus, At denotes the approximated cross-sectional area of the threaded
portion having the length lt and Ad is the cross-sectional area of the unthreaded portion having the length ld .

3. Finite element model of an engine block

This section describes the the finite element model. The mesh is be discussed and modeling of the bolts’ mass
and stiffness, as well as two different modeling variants with differing member stiffness are presented. Simplified
geometries of an aluminum, 3-cylinder automotive engine are investigated in this study, cf. Figure 1. The parts
involved are a crank case and a cylinder head, which are the central components of an engine block. They are joined
with 8 bolts that fasten the cylinder head via threads tapped into the crank case. Crank case meshed in Abaqus/CAE
with an approximate global seed size of 10 mm, 327190 tetrahedral quadratic elements C3D10 with 0.027 % distorted
and 1410585 degrees of freedom. The cylinder head meshed in with an approximate global seed size of 10 mm,
167077 tetrahedral quadratic elements C3D10 with 0.0030 % distorted and 717648 degrees of freedom.
According to the Abaqus documentation [19], kinematic coupling constraints are based on degree of freedom-
elimination, which limit the motion of a group of nodes to the rigid body motion defined by a reference node. Hereby
a kinematic relation is established between point or reference node and slave nodes. Kinematic coupling constraints
are useful in cases where a large number of nodes is constrained to the rigid body motion of a single node and the
degrees of freedom that participate in the constraint are selected individually in a local coordinate system. In such
cases, multi-point constraints (MPC) would have to be prescribed individually for each constrained node. Using a
connector element is an easy way to model complex kinematic and kinetic relationships between two bodies with
discrete geometry, connector elements function on a node-to-node basis [19]. In this study, an axial connection type
will be chosen to model springs resembling joint member stiffnesses and fastener stiffnesses within a bolted joint
assembly.

3.1. Determination of member stiffness

Several models can be proposed for determination of the member stiffness. Model variant 1, cf. Figure 2(a): All
dashed, colored lines represent an MPC tying member nodes to a reference point marked with ’×’. The model is
 P. Langer et al. / Procedia Engineering 199 (2017) 954–959 957
4 P. Langer / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

X
Y

Y X

(a) (b)

Fig. 1: Simplified geometries of an 3-cylinder automotive engine; (a) FE model of the crank case; (b) FE model of the cylinder head

assumed to be rotationally symmetrical with respect to the dot-dashed line on the left. Hence, all lines in this sectional
plane drawn perpendicular to the symmetry-axis become annuli and lines drawn in parallel fashion translate to a
hollow cylinder in three-dimensional space. The interface area experiencing contact pressure is split up in accordance
to Marshall’s et al. results [14] . The connector element labeled ’MS-hi’ connects reference points referring to
the inner annuli on the first and second members’ interface areas, respectively, hereby representing an area of high
interface stiffness. The connector element labeled ’MS-lo’ connects reference points referring to the outer annuli on
the first and second members’ interface areas, respectively. This connector element models the low interface stiffness
distributed over a larger area.
Model variant 2, cf. Figure 2(b): The fastener stiffnesses’ and masses’ modeling is the same as that for model
variant 1. However, as experimental, cf. Figure 3(a), and numerical results, cf. Figure 3(b) - Figure 3(c), show,
interface pressure is rather evenly distributed and not constricted to a concentrated area around the bolt holes as
predicted by VDI [20]. A connector element establishes a relation between MPCs covering the cylinder head’s and
crank case’s entire interface area, respectively. The computed individual member stiffnesses act as springs in parallel,
their sum is assigned as an elasticity property to the axial connector element.

Bolt head

Member 1

Bolt Stiffness

MS-lo
Axial Tie
MPC
MS-hi y
x
z

Engaged threads

Member 2 Z
X

(a) (b)

Fig. 2: (a) FE model - variant 1. (b) FE model - variant 2

3.2. Determination of mass and stiffness of Bolts

The bolt head’s bearing area is tied to a reference point, which is then connected to a reference point tying the
bolt’s engaged threads via an axial connector element, cf. Figure 2(a). Said connector element acts as a linear spring
and is assigned the computed fastener or bolt stiffness, cf. Eq. 3. A continuum distributing coupling can be used to
distribute a feature’s mass inertia to surfaces with which it is in contact. This technique is used to determination of
mass and the stiffness of bolt within the FE model. Further details are elaborated in the Abaqus documentation [19].
958 P. Langer et al. / Procedia Engineering 199 (2017) 954–959
P. Langer / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000 5

4. Results

4.1. Pressure distribution

The pressure distribution in the joint interface of the crank case and cylinder head is measured with pressure
sensitive film to quantify it. The set-up involves the crank case, cylinder head, and one M10x25 screw. Figure 3(a)
c
shows three different FUJIFILM pressure sensitive films ranging from 0.5 MPa to 50 MPa. Pressures above 10 MPa
couldnt be measured. A spread-out pressure distribution is to be expected for very large clamping lengths, and while
large pressures away from the bolt at the piston hole’s edge seem counter-intuitive, these are confirmed through
numerical results for the complete assembly with 8 bolts, cf. Figure 3(b) - 3(c). Figure 3(b) shows a plot of von Mises
stress of the pre-stressed cylinder head obtained from numerical results. The sectional plane-cut normal to the joint
interface through two bolts’ axes of rotation shows the partially developed, overlapping pressure cones. Figure 3(c)
shows the crank case’s interface contact pressure distribution from pre-stress analysis with the FE model. The highest
wide-spread pressure is roughly 6 MPa, which is slightly less than the experimentally determined one. However, the
overall pressure distribution agrees closely. As shown in Figure 3(a), the pressure is fairly evenly distributed instead
of concentrated around the bolt. Peak pressures seem to occur ever so slightly away from the bolt hole, as Marshall et
al. [14] suggest, and at the piston holes edge.

* ** ***

(a) (b) (c)

c
Fig. 3: (a) Pressure distribution quantified with FUJIFILM pressure sensitive film; (*) 10-50 MPa; (**) 2.5-10 MPa; (***) 0.5-2.5 MPa. (b)
Pressure cone from finite element model. (c) Interface pressure distribution from the finite element model.

4.2. Comparison of experiment and simulation

Figure 4 shows the comparison for the assembly’s first two eigenmodes and their corresponding eigenfrequencies
computed by applying the FEM to experimental results from EMA. Model variant 2 includes error bars resulting
from uncertainties involving Young’s modulus, E, and the model’s density, ρ. The diagram shows that model variant 2
approximates real physical behavior better than model variant 1 does.

Model variant 1: Member stiffness applied to annuli around each bolt hole
Model variant 2: Member stiffness applied to entire joint interface
Experimental results

2.2×103 Mode 1 Mode 2

2×103
frequency [Hz]

1.8×103

1.6×103

1.4×103
1 2
Mode number

Fig. 4: Comparison of FE models’ results to experimental results

 P. Langer et al. / Procedia Engineering 199 (2017) 954–959 959
6 P. Langer / Procedia Engineering 00 (2017) 000–000

5. Conclusions

A widely applicable method of modeling bolted joint stiffness for FEM has been proposed and compared to existing
methods and experimental results. It is based on an analytical approach for member and fastener stiffness calculation,
delivers satisfactory results, and is efficient in terms of computational time. As the results show, tangential stiffness is
essential for accurate prediction of a system’s dynamic behavior, especially for torsional modes. Only a normal joint
member stiffness can be computed analytically because rough surfaces are not sufficiently represented with analytical
methods and only perfectly flat and smooth surfaces can be taken into account. Further approximations need to
be made to achieve even better results. Petuelli [21] reports an increase in normal interface stiffness for decreasing
member surface roughnesses. However, alternatives exist to the analytical methods used in this study for quantifying
stiffness resulting from bolt pre-tensioning. A simple approach proposed by Fukuoka et al. [22] is to neglect pre-
existing strains and stresses within the joint members as a whole and rely solely on contact stiffness and pressure. If
an exact bolt load can be determined with a new method leaving behind the uncertainties described by NASA [23],
contact pressure p can be easily calculated as a function of the pressure cone angle. Further research needs to be
conducted to provide reliable approximations of bolted joints’ non-linear behavior. A first step could be to address the
issue of obtaining tangential stiffness from analytical methods.

References
[1] J. Wileman, M. Choudhury and I. Green, Computation of member stiffness in bolted connections, Trans. ASME J. Mech. Des., 113, 1991,
432-437.
[2] O. Zhang and J. A. Poirier, New Analytical Model of Bolted Joints. ASME. J. Mech. Des. 2004;126(4):721-728.
[3] N. L. Pederson and P. Pederson, Boltplate contact assemblies with prestress and external loads: Solved with super element technique, Computers
and Structure, Vol.87, (2009), 13741383.
[4] J. Kim, J.-C. Yoon and B.-S Kang, Finite element analysis and modeling of structure with bolted joints, Applied Mathematical Modelling,
31(5) 2007, 895-911.
[5] X. Ma, L. Bergman and A. Vakakis, Identification of Bolted Joints Through Laser Vibrometry, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 246(3), 2001,
441- 460.
[6] J. D. Reid and N. R. Hiser, Detailed modeling of bolted joints with slippage, Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 41(6), 2005, 547-562.
[7] R. A. Ibrahim and C. L. Pettit, Uncertainties and dynamic problems of bolted joints and other fasteners, Journal of Sound and Vibration,
279(3-5), 2005, 857-936.
[8] K. Sepahvand, S. Marburg, and H.-J. Hardtke, Uncertainty quantification in stochastic systems using polynomial chaos expansion, International
Journal of Applied Mechanics 2(2),2010, 305-353.
[9] C. F. Beads, Damping in structural joints, The Shock and Vibration Digest, 14(6), 1982, 9-11.
[10] I. Zaman, et. al., The effects of bolted joints on dynamic response of structures, Materials Science and Engineering, 50, 2013, 012018(1-6).
[11] C.J. Hartwigsen et. al., Experimental study of non-linear effects in a typical shear lap joint configuration, Journal of Sound and Vibration,
277,(1-2), 2004, 327-351.
[12] Oskouei, RH. and Keikhosravy, M. and Soutis, C., Estimating clamping pressure distribution and stiffness in aircraft bolted joints by finite-
element analysis, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering. 223 (2009) 863–871.
[13] Nawras, H. Mostafa and Obeed, Salwan and Jawad, Mohamed, Mathematical representation of bolted-joint stiffness: A new suggested model,
Journal of mechanical science and technology. 25 (2011) 2827–2834.
[14] Marshall, MB and Lewis, R and Dwyer-Joyce, RS, Characterisation of contact pressure distribution in bolted joints, Strain. 42 (2006) 31–43.
[15] Bittner, U., Strukturakustische Optimierung von Axialkolbeneinheiten. PhD thesis, KIT Karlsruhe, (2012).
[16] Kragelski, I. and Dobychin, M. and Kombalov, V., Friction and Wear - Calculation Methods. (1982).
[17] Geisler, J., Numerische und experimentelle Untersuchungen zum dynamischen Verhalten von Strukturen mit Fügestellen. PhD thesis, Univer-
sität Erlangen-Nürnberg, (2010).
[18] Budynas, R.G. and Nisbett, J.K., Shigley’s Mechanical Engineering Design, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1979.
[19] Abaqus, Abaqus 6.14 Online Documentation, Dassault Systems, Providence, RI, USA (2014).
[20] VDI-Richtlinie, 2230 Blatt 1: Systematische Berechnung hochbeanspruchter Schraubenverbindungen, Berlin: Beuth 2003.
[21] Petuelli, G., Theoretische und experimentelle Bestimmung der Steifigkeits- und Dämpfungseigenschaften normalbelasteter Fügestellen. PhD
thesis, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, (1983).
[22] Fukuoka, T. and Nomura, M. and Sugano, N., Experimental investigation and finite element analysis of the free vibration problem of bolted
joint by taking account of interface stiffness, Journal of Environment and Engineering. 4 (2009) 101–111.
[23] National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Space Shuttle: Criteria for Preloaded Bolts. NSTS 08307 Revision A. (1998).