Shear Lag

17/11/2018 Prof. Carlos Montestruque 1

 Shear Lag
SHEAR LAG
 Thin sheet structures under loading conditions that produce
characteristically large and non-uniform axial (stringer) stress.
 More pronounced in shells of shallow section than in shells in
deep section.
 Much more important in wings than in fuselage ( if the basic method
of construction is similar)
 The effect of sheet panel shear strains is to cause some stringers to
resist less or more axial load than those calculated by beam
theory   My / I
 In general, the shear lag effect in skin-stringer box beam is not
appreciable except for the following situations:
 Thin or soft (i.e., aluminum) skin
 Cutouts which cause one or more stringers
to be discontinued
 Large abrupt changes in external load applications
 Abrupt changes in stringer areas
17/11/2018 2
 Shear Lag
Example:
Axial constraint stresses in a doubly symmetrical, single cell,
six boom beam subject to shear.

• The bending stress in box beams do not always conform very closely
to the predictions of the simple beam bending theory.
• The deviations from the theory are caused primary by the shear
deformations in the skin panels of the box that constitutes the
flanges of the beam.
• The problem of analyzing these deviations from the simple beam
bending theory become known as the SHEAR LAG EFFECT
17/11/2018 3
 Shear Lag
Solution:
Top cover of beam

Loads on web and corner booms of beam

Equilibrium of an edge boom element

PB Sy
PB  z  PB  qz  z  0
z 2h

PB Sy
q 0
z 2h

17/11/2018 4
 Shear Lag
Similarly for an element of the central boom

PA
 2q  0
z

Now considering the overall equilibrium of a length z of the cover, we have

Sy
2PB  PA  z0
h

17/11/2018 5
 Shear Lag
We now consider the compatibility condition which exists in the displacement of
elements of the boom and adjacent elements of the panel.

1  B z  1   A z  d  z or
 1
  B   A 
z z d
in which  A and  B are the normal strains in the elements of boom

Now P PA q dq Gt  PB PA 
B  B A      
BE AE Gt dz dE  B A 

17/11/2018 6
 Shear Lag
Choosing PA , say, the unknown to be determined initially.
dq Gt  PB PA  PA Sy
     2q  0 2PB  PA  z0
dz dE  B A  z h
From these equations, we have
1  2PA Gt  PA Sy z PA 
     
2 z 2 dE  2B 2Bh A 

 2PA Gt 2B  A  GtS y z

Rearranging we obtain  P 
z 2
A
dEAB dEBh

 2PA GtS y z
or  2
P 
z 2
A
dEBh

Gt 2B  A 
Where 2  is the shear lag constant
dEAB
The differential equation solution is
Sy A
PA  C cosh z  Dsinhz  z
h2B  A 
The arbitrary constant C and D are determinate from the boundary conditions of the
cover of the beam.
17/11/2018 7
 Shear Lag

PA
PB  0 when z = 0
  z  0 when z = L
; q

Gt 2Gt
From the first of these C = 0 and from the second

Sy A
D
h2B  A cosh L

Sy A  sinhz 
Thus PA   z  
h2B  A    cosh L 
The normal stress distribution  A  PA A follows
Sy  sinhz 
A   z  
h2B  A    cosh L 
The distribution of load in the edge boom is
Sy S yB  A sinhz 
2PB  PA  z0 PB    z  
h h2B  A   2B cosh L 
Sy  A sinhz 
whence B   z  
h2B  A   2B cosh L 

17/11/2018 8
 Shear Lag

The shear flow

PA
 2q  0
z

Sy A  cosh z 
whence q 1 
2h2B  A   cosh L 
q
The shear stress  
t
Sy A  cosh z 
 1 
2ht2B  A   cosh L 

Elementary theory gives

Sy z
 A  B  
h2B  A

Sy A
q
2h2B  A 

17/11/2018 9
 Shear Lag
Rectangular section beam supported at corner booms only
The analysis is carried out in an identical manner to that in the previous case except
that the boundary conditions for the central stringer are PA  0 when z = 0 and z = L.

Sy A  sinhz 
PA   z L 
h2B  A   sinhL 

SyB  AL sinhz 
PB    z  
h2B  A   2B sinhL 

Sy A  cosh z 
q  1  L 
2h2B  A   sinhL 

Gt 2B  A 
Where 2  is the shear lag constant
dEAB

17/11/2018 10
 Shear Lag
Beam subjected to combined bending and axial load

17/11/2018 11
 Shear Lag
PB1 is load in boom 1

PB2 is load in boom 2

Equilibrium of boom 2
PB1
 q1
z
Equilibrium of central stringer A
PA
 q1  q2
z
Equilibrium of boom 2
PB2
 q2
z
Longitudinal equilibrium

PB1  PB2  PA  P
Moment equilibrium about boom 2

PB12d  PAd  P2d

17/11/2018 12
 Shear Lag
The compatibility condition now includes the effect of bending in addition to extension
as shown in figure below
 d 1 d2 v 
1   A z  1  B1 z  d  2 z
 dz dz 
Where  1and z are function of z only
d 1 1 d2 v
Thus   A  B1   2
dz d dz
Similarly for an element of the
lower panel

d 2 1 d2 v
 B2   A   2
dz d dz
Subtraction these equation

d 1 d 2 1
  2 A  B1  B2 
dz dz d

or, as before dq1 dq2 Gt  2PA PB1 PB2 

     
dz dz dE  A B B 

17/11/2018 13
 Shear Lag
Choose PA as the unknown, and using these equations

dPA
 q1  q2 PB12d  PAd  P2d PB1  PB2  PA  P
dz

dq1 dq2 Gt  2PA PB1 PB2 

     
dz dz dE  A B B 

d2PA Gt  2B  A  PGt
we obtain   PA  
dz2 dE  AB  dEB

d2PA PGt
or  2
PA  
dz2 dEB
Gt 2B  A 
Where 2  is the shear lag constant
dEAB
The differential equation solution is
PA
PA  C cosh z  Dsinhz 
2B  A
The arbitrary constant C and D are determinate from the boundary conditions of the
cover of the beam.
17/11/2018 14
 Shear Lag

PA
PA  0 when z = 0 ; q1  q2  0   when z = L
z
we have the distribution load in the central stringer
PA
PA  1  cosh z  tanh L sinhz 
2B  A

PA  cosh  L  z  
or, rearranging PA  1  
2B  A  cosh L 

The distribution of load in the edge booms 1 and 2

PA  4B  A cosh  L  z    PA  cosh  L  z  
PB1     PB2  1 
22B  A   A cosh L  22B  A   cosh L 
Finally the shear flow distribution are
 PB1 PA sinh L  z  PB2  PA sinh L  z 
q1   q2  
z 22B  A  cosh L z 22B  A  cosh L

The shear flow q1 and q2 are self-equilibrating and are entirely produced by shear lag
effect ( since no shear loads are applied).

17/11/2018 15