Published by : International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)

http://www.ijert.org ISSN: 2278-0181

Vol. 5 Issue 09, September-2016

Design, Fabrication, Static Testing and Analysis

of Composite Wing box using E-Glass Epoxy
Composite
B. Siva Prasad1
Assistant Professor, CH. Ravinder Reddy2, P. Srikanth3, B.Nikhil4
Department of Aeronautical Engineering, Department of Aeronautical Engineering,
Vignan's Institute of Technology & Aeronautical Vignan's Institute of Technology & Aeronautical Engineering,
Engineering, Hyderabad-508284, India
Hyderabad-508284, India

Abstract: In general sense, wing can be assumed to be after achieving a design which is feasible, from a strength
cantilevered to the fuselage. All airplane wings need viewpoint, and which is close enough to the target weight.
longitudinal members to sustain the bending moments. These This design is not necessarily a minimum weight design. A
moments are caused due to lift force which acts upwards. typical schematic of a wingbox is shown in Fig.1.
Thus the lower cover is loaded primarily in tension and upper
cover is loaded primarily in compression. As a result of the all
lift forces evolved, there is a large moment created at the
intersection of the wing and fuselage. Those moments cannot
be sustained by wing and fuselage attachments. All these
moments are withstand by Wingbox which connects with to
the fuselage. The present investigation deals with the design,
manufacture and structural testing of a composite wingbox
made out of E-Glass epoxy. Finally the results are validated
using FEM ( Nastran ) software package.

Keywords: Fuselage, wing, lift, moment, composite, structural

Fig.1. Wing Box
test, wingbox, E-Glass epoxy.

I. INTRODUCTION II. METHODOLOGY

The structural design of an airframe is determined by As per the literature survey [1], the outer dimensions of the
multidisciplinary criteria (stress, fatigue, buckling, control wingbox at root section should be as follows
surface effectiveness, flutter and weight etc.). Several
Length 320 mm
thousands of structural sizes of stringers, panels, ribs etc.
have to be determined considering hundreds of thousands Width 370 mm
of requirements to find an optimum solution, i.e. a design Height 70mm
fulfilling all requirements with a minimum weight or TABLE 1. Scaled Configuration of Wing Box
minimum cost respectively. The design process involves
various groups of the airframe manufacturer and its
suppliers, and requires the application of complex analysis The load distribution[1] along the span of the wingbox is
procedures to show compliance with all design criteria. shown in Fig.2, Shear force and bending moment
Traditionally the structural sizes of a wing box are calculations for the selected wing are given in Fig.3 &4.
determined by the stress group of the airframe
manufacturer or its supplier. This is done by analysing the
stress and buckling reserves for a few selected loads.

Modification of the structural sizes usually affects not only

local stresses but also the internal load distribution.
Therefore, this approach requires an iterative, complicated
and time-consuming process. Since the design process is
performed with a few dominating load cases only, there is a
risk of not meeting the design criteria for the complete set
of design driving load cases. Furthermore, fatigue
requirements are only considered on an approximate basis
[2], [3]
.This can result in re-work and additional cost when
the full set of load-cases and fatigue criteria are considered
later in the design process. Due to resources and time Fig. 2. Wing Loading
limitations, the manual iterative process is usually stopped

IJERTV5IS090561 www.ijert.org 587

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
Published by : International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
http://www.ijert.org ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 5 Issue 09, September-2016

CALCULATIONS

Fig.5. SHOWING WING BOX DIMENSIONS

Bending moment at station 0

Fig.3. Shear force diagram
𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑘𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 142
𝑟= = = 71
2 2
𝑏𝑡 3
𝐼𝑥𝑥 = 2[ + 𝐴𝑌 2 ]
12
b is 55% of chord=653mm

t thickness of composite unknown

𝑀 𝐹
= =𝑍
𝐼 𝑌
𝑡3 𝑡 2
Fig.4. Bending Moment Diagram 𝐼𝑥𝑥 = 2[𝑏 × + [(𝑏 × 𝑡) (𝑦 − ) ]]
12 2
By using deformation theories as follows, we can formulate
an equation to find the thickness of wingbox C-
section[5],[6,],[7], [8]
M F ` Finally t = 5.68 at station ‘0’
=
I Y
M = Bending moment Considering the factor of safety and ply drop-off, the
F = Flexural strength minimum thickness of composite is increased to 7mm
Considering the aerofoil section in the wing to be a box
section for calculations convenience (Fig.5). t = 7mm
The moment of inertia at each station is
calculated, which is the function of t (composite thickness). III. DESIGN OF MOULD
We will get equation in terms of t, composite thickness is The Matched Die Molds ( Fig.6) are initially
obtained after solving the equation. Span-wise wing designed in CAD software and manufactured. These
thickness is obtained. moulds are used to make the required composite parts.
The chord-wise thickness is obtained by CFD analysis. The
aerofoil is divided into 5 zones chord-wise. With the
varying pressure values in zones the thickness is obtained.

The estimated composite thickness for one ply from

previous results is 0.5. Therefore to get 7.5 thickness 15
plies are used.

Fig.6. Matched Die Molds

IJERTV5IS090561 www.ijert.org 588

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
Published by : International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
http://www.ijert.org ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 5 Issue 09, September-2016

IV.SELECTION OF MATERIAL
A. E-Glass Fabric
TABLE 2. RECTANGULAR LAMINATE SPECIFICATIONS
The use of E-Glass Fabric as the reinforcement
C-section specifications
material in polymer matrix composites is extremely
Length 3700mm
common. Optimal strength properties are gained when
Width 40mm(WEB)&70mm(flange)
straight, continuous fibers are aligned parallel in a single
direction. To promote strength in other directions, laminate Thickness 16mm
structures can be constructed, with continuous fibers
aligned in other directions. Such structures are used in TABLE 3. C-SECTION LAMINATE SPECIFICATION
storage tanks and the like.
Technical specifications:
1. Nomenclature : 13 mil E‐GLASS
FABRIC
2. Thickness, mm : 0.36
3. Width, inch : 40"
3. Weave : 4 Harness Satin
B. Resin and Hardener
Resin and hardener used in this project are Lapox
L-12 (Resin) and K-6 (Hardener) respectively.

V.FABRICATION OF WING BOX

As the other layup techniques involve lot of workload,
equipment and costly and time consuming we preferred to
use the hand layup assisted Matched Die Molding
technique as it exactly suits our requirements.
Fig.7. Top view of wing box
A. Fabrication of E-Glass Epoxy Laminates & C-Sections
Single layer of a laminated composite material is
generally referred to as a ply or laminate. It usually
contains a single layer of reinforcement, unidirectional or
multidirectional. A single lamina is generally too thin to be
directly used in any engineering application. Several
laminae are bonded together to form a structure termed as
laminate. Properties and orientation of the laminae in a Fig.8. Front View of Wing Box
laminate are chosen to meet the laminate design Dimensions of wing box.
requirements. Properties of a laminate may be predicted by Length 370mm
knowing the properties of its constituent laminae. Width 320mm
Height 80mm
The various steps involved in the manufacture of Number of rivets 28
composite laminate are TABLE 4. DIMENSIONS OF WING BOX
1. Marking the fabric as per the mold dimensions
2. Mixing of matrix (Resin and Hardener (1:10) ) VI. TESTING AND ANALYSIS
3. Application of resin mix on the fabric The static analysis of wing box is carried out using NX9
4. Lay up on the mold software. Being a structure the main loads on the wing acts
5. Closure of Mold as the cantilever loads, the main purpose of the wing box is
to with stand the cantilever loads acting on the wing as they
Finally it is allowed for 24 hours to cure the are interconnected. So we can analyse the load effect on the
rectangular laminate / C-section. After the curing is over, wingbox [10].
the laminate and C-Sections are trimmed using diamond
edge cutter at the edges to match the planned dimensions. The composite wing box structure was then tested and
analysed under the designed loads.
The specifications of the rectangular laminate and
C-section are given in the following tables. A. Static Analysis in NX9
Rectangular laminate specifications Earlier we have designed the wing box structure in the
solid works software and later imported to NX9 for the
Length 370mm analysis, now the simulation file is updated.
Width 320 The meshed body and loading conditions are shown in
Thickness 5mm Fig:9. The analytical results obtained i.e. the displacements
Number of laminates 2 for various applied loads are shown in Fig. 10, 11 & 12.

IJERTV5IS090561 www.ijert.org 589

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
Published by : International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
http://www.ijert.org ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 5 Issue 09, September-2016

B. Experimental Testing
The experimental analysis is done now to correlate the
computational results
1) Test Setup
3 holes are drilled to wing box at one end to fix it and other
end 2 holes are drilled to apply loads. Then a loading setup
as shown in Fig.13 is attached to the wingbox at its free
end to apply loads.

Fig.9. Boundary Conditions

Fig.13. Experiment Set Up

2) Deflection meter
The deflection of beam for particular load is obtained using
Fig.10. Displacement for 1500N
the deflection meter attached at the free end of the section
as shown in Fig.14.

Fig.14. Deflection Guage

The loading has carried out by gradually increasing the

loads and the respective applied loads and its response to
the applied load were noted down carefully. The various
Fig.11. Displacement for 2000N deflections resulted due to the application of various loads
are shown in TABLE 5.

Experimental
Load(N)
deflection(mm)
200 0.7
230 0.8
250 0.9
270 1
300 1.05
320 1.14
350 1.25
500 3.25
1000 7.1
1500 12.45
2000 18.95
2500 23.15
Fig.12. Displacement for 2500N
TABLE 5. Load and Deflection

IJERTV5IS090561 www.ijert.org 590

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
Published by : International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
http://www.ijert.org ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 5 Issue 09, September-2016

After the application of 2500N load at the free end we have REFERENCES
observed De-Laminations at fixed end. We considered it as [1] P.Sharada Vani, D.V.Ramana Reddy, B.Siva Prasad and K.Chandra
sekhar "Design and Analysis of A320 Wing using E-Glass Epoxy
a failure and stopped loading it further. The De-lamination
Composite, Vol. 3 Issue 11, November-2014,pp 536-539
at the fixed end are shown in Fig.15. [2] Aeroelastic Analysis of Composite Wings, Carlos E. S. Cesnik,∗
Dewey H. Hodges† and Mayuresh J. Patil‡ Georgia Institute of
Technology, Atlanta, Georgia
[3] Aero-structural wing design optimization using high-fidelity
sensitivity analysis, Joaquim R. R. A. Martins and Juan J. Alonso
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Stanford University,
Stanford, CA 94305 James Reuther NASA Ames Research
CenterMoff et Field, CA 95035
[4] Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Of A Regional Aircraft Wing
Box, G. Schuhmacher†, I. Murra‡, L. Wang§, A. Laxander, O. J.
O’Leary and M. Herold** Fairchild Dornier GmbH, 82230
Wessling, Germany
[5] “An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids” by S. H. Crandall,
N.C. Dahl, and T. J. Lardner
[6] “Aircraft Structures for Engineering Students” by T.H.G. Megson
[7] “Airframe Structural Design” by Michael CY Niu
Fig.15. Component After Final Testing [8] Buchanan, G.R., Mechanics of Materials, HRW Inc., New York,
1988.
C. Comparison of Computational and Experimental [9] Ugural, A.C. and Fenster, S.K., Advanced Strength and Applied
Analysis Elasticity, 3rd ed. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1995.
[10] Swanson, S.R., Introduction to Design and Analysis with Advanced
Computational Experimental Composite Ma- terials, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1997.
Load(N)
deflection(mm) deflection(mm) [11] Lubin , Hand book of composites, Van Nostarnd, New York, 1982.
200 0.0896 0.7 [2] Encyclopedia of Polymer Science Engineering, H.F. Mark
Edition,JohnWiley and Sons, New York ,1985.
230 0.1031 0.8
250 0.112 0.9
270 0.121 1
300 0.134 1.05
320 0.143 1.14
350 0.157 1.25
500 0.224 3.25
1000 0.448 7.1
1500 0.672 12.45
2000 0.896 18.95
2500 1.12 23.15
TABLE 6. Comparison of computational and experimental analysis

VII. CONCLUSION
The following conclusions are derived

1. The values of deflection in the experiment is not

too close as compared to analysis because of
unpredictable behaviour of composites.
2. The experimentation is not as simple as fixing the
boundary condition in software, so the constraints
play a major role
3. The computational stiffness of structure is very
high compared to experimental, this may lead to
property validation of composite material
4. The present results generated are used to validate
the property of material or it can also be used as a
research topic for further projects

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
We would like to thank Mr. S.Y.Veerabhadra Reddy
Sc"E", Mr. A.Karthik Sc:D", Mr. D.Naresh and Mr. N.Sai
kumar and other ENTEST, RCI (DRDO) staff for their
valuable guidance.

IJERTV5IS090561 www.ijert.org 591

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)