Intro

BACKGROUND
The most basic design calculation for bolted joints is to divide the joint load (Pmax) by the bolt proof stress (Sp
to obtain the needed bolt cross section area (At). And, of course, a design safety factor must also be include
This calculation doesn't provide the number of bolts, but usually, many small bolts are better than a few large
The follow-up step is to tighten these bolts as much as possible, for fear that they might come loose in service
While there are a number of more subtle joint design issues, this very basic design approach is surprizingly g

Most textbooks apply the safety factor to the bolt strength, while most practicioners prefer the safety factor on
Simply stated, this is because a safety factor of 1.2 satisfies nobody, while the safety factor of 4 means bolts

There are two basic situations to be considered in evaluating the behavior of the bolted joint:
* When tightening the bolt, the force (Fb) stretching the bolt must be equal to the force compressing the join
* When loads are applied to the joint, the length changes in the bolt (b) and joint (m) must be equal. Also
combined forces: bolt (Fb), joint (Fm), and applied (P) must balance ( F = 0).

BOLTED JOINT BEHAVIOR

When a bolt is tightened, its grip is stretched by the bolt preload force (Fi). At the same time, the joint (or me
compressed by this same preload force (Fi). When an external load (P) is later applied to the joint, the bolt st
as illustrated by the top Figure. At the same time, this load (P) decreases the joint (or member ) compression,
the second Figure. As the applied load is increased, the joint clamping force will approach zero, where upon
will separate or unseat. Beyond the unseating load, the bolt tension (Fb) is equal to the joint load (P) ...as if t
not there, which is illustrated by the dashed and solid lines in the top Figure. This parallel spring model (bolt in
joint in compression) is the basic method used to evaluate bolted joints. The first two Figures are combined i
to provide a simple graphical basis for understanding. From this graph, it should be apparent that the designe
to choose the bolt preload that roughly matches the bolt strength to joint unseating load. This is the justificati
opening statement, ...that the needed bolt section area (At) is roughly the joint load (P) divided by the proof st
The somewhat curious note is that bolts are often preloaded to 60-90% of proof strength, and then a similar lo
applied to the joint ...without overloading the bolt !

The important "joint stiffness fraction" (C) is obtained from the parallel spring model. A spring constant (K) is
as the force divided by resulting deflection. The bolt is a cylinder that experiences uniform stretch, which mea
constant (Kb) is simply the elastic modulus (Eb) times the tensile stress area (At) divided by the grip length (L
distribution of stresss and strains in the joint is both very non-uniform, and a subject for lengthy analysis. The
practice is to define an '"equivalent spring region" around each bolt. as illustrated by the cones in the second
small ends are meant to represent the head and nut areas, while the conical shapes reflect the spreading of s
the middle of the joint. A simple approximation for the spring constant of this volume is provided on the right.
very lengthy analysis, this should be considered a reasonable approximation that is neither precise, or highly
The "joint stiffness fraction" (C) is obtained from the parallel spring model. The joint and member spring deflect
equal (assuming the joint doesn't unseat). This means that the ratio of spring force changes is the same as t
spring constants.

GENERAL COMMENTS
The factors to be considered (failure modes, or limiting cases) in the selection of the bolt preload are:
1. Tensile yielding or failure in the bolt grip material.
2. Compressive yielding (crush) of the joint material under the bolt head or nut.
3. Unseating (or seperation) of the joint halves.
4. Shear failure (or strippiing) of the threads at the thread major diameter.

So, for example, if the bolts are loose, the allowable joint loads would be limited by premature joint unseating
At first glance, it would appear that the desired preload is the value that would maximize the allowed joint load
that would produce simultaneous failures by all four modes above. However, this approach tends to be modi
consequences of each of the failure modes are considered. The first two modes tend to be somewhat "forgiv

Page 1
 Intro

last two tend to be more serious concerns. With ductile materials, a small amount of yielding will stretch the b
joint, which often has the net effect of relaxing the preload (Fi) to the value that should have been selected. H
reduces the service safety factors. If these chosen safety factors were generous, the results may still be acc
Joint unseating tends to be more catistrophic because even small side loads will cause abrasive wear of the j
which very quickly reduces the bolt preload to zero (loose bolts). Stripping threads also tends to be a catastro
because they usually "strip one at a time" in cascading manner that quickly reduces the joint load capacity. T
help to justify the general practice, which is to "error on the tight side", so long as the engaged thread length i
note on joint shear loads is needed. Bolts are intended to be tension members, so large shear loads can be v
The only resistance for shear loads is friction between the joint halves, which suggests a large number of bolt
forces. The designer should consider the common practice of "cross bolting".

A related area of great interest is designing for fatigue loading. Since the fatigue strength is so much lower th
the designer is often tempted to consider low bolt preloads, for fear of fatigue failures in the bolts. However b
(low C) the alternating loads in the bolt can be significantly reduced. The joint alternating loads remain high,
where fatigue is rarely a concern. So with a large number of bolts, and a large preload the ratio of bolt alterna
can be reduced to a low ratio where the bolt material failure is governed by yielding, rather than fatigue.

Page 2
 Intro

Page 3
 Intro

Page 4