journal article·2026-07-21

Integrated geometric refinement of Ti-6Al-4V containment casings balancing mass reduction and constitutive sensitivity under impact loading

Carlos Beecher, Angelo Oñate, Rodrigo Valle, César Garrido, Víctor Tuninetti

Publisher page

Abstract

The prevention of catastrophic fracture during fan blade-out (FBO) events is a critical requirement for aero-engine safety certification. While the suppression of void growth under triaxial compression is a known mechanical principle, this research establishes how macroscopic geometric compliance can be used to actively control the local triaxiality history during high-strain-rate impacts. Rather than treating parameter sensitivity and structural mass as isolated variables, this study shows that increasing global structural flexibility physically forces the local dynamic stress tensor into a compressive state, preventing fracture. Utilizing a finite element model of a Trent 1000-class turbofan, an iterative geometric refinement was performed to minimize casing mass without compromising energy absorption capability. The Johnson–Cook (J–C) plasticity and damage laws for the Ti-6Al-4V alloy served as the baseline, with a conservative limit model developed to account for identified ±5% calibration uncertainties in thermal softening ( m ) and strain rate sensitivity ( C ). Numerical results demonstrate that a 6.3% reduction in casing mass is achievable while maintaining a factor of safety (FS) of 1.25 under nominal loading and 1.66 under conservative material assumptions. The analysis reveals that the optimized, more compliant geometry facilitates beneficial cycles of triaxial compression near −0.7, which suppresses void nucleation and prevents catastrophic perforation. This study provides a validated engineering framework for the design of lightweight, damage-tolerant containment systems that remain resilient even under unfavorable constitutive calibration scenarios.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior · Metal Forming Simulation Techniques · Fatigue and fracture mechanics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Universidad de La Frontera

University of Liege

Faculty of Engineering, Universidad de Concepción

Universidad Autónoma de Chile

Universidad del Bío-Bío

Funding

Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo

References (48)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.3390/aerospace1201000310.3390/aerospace12010003 ↗
2. 10.3390/aerospace1101005110.3390/aerospace11010051 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.cja.2021.04.00410.1016/j.cja.2021.04.004 ↗
4. 10.1007/s40430-018-1168-710.1007/s40430-018-1168-7 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.10791310.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.107913 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.matdes.2024.11340910.1016/j.matdes.2024.113409 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2024.10489810.1016/j.ijimpeng.2024.104898 ↗
8. 10.1063/1.362359510.1063/1.3623595 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.actamat.2024.11978010.1016/j.actamat.2024.119780 ↗
10. Guzmán C. F., Tuninetti V., Gilles G., et al. (2015). Assessment of damage and anisotropic plasticity models to predict Ti-6Al-4V behavior. Key Engineering Materials 651: 651–653.
11. 10.1016/j.cja.2020.08.05010.1016/j.cja.2020.08.050 ↗
12. 10.1007/978-1-4899-7547-8_510.1007/978-1-4899-7547-8_5 ↗
13. 10.1016/0013-7944(85)90052-910.1016/0013-7944(85)90052-9 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.jmps.2018.07.02510.1016/j.jmps.2018.07.025 ↗
15. Kay GJ (2003) Failure Modelling of Titanium 6Al-4V and Aluminum 2024-T3 With the Johnson-Cook Material Model. DOT Report DOT/FAA/AR(September).10.2172/15006359 ↗
16. Leseur D (1999) Experimental investigations of material models for Ti-6A1-4V and 2024-T3. In FAA. 10.2172/11977.10.2172/11977 ↗
17. Liu D (2026) Dynamic analysis for turbine blade-shaving and thin-wall casing containment evaluation in an aero-engine. Journal of Vibration and Control. https://doi.org/10.1177/10775463261429058.
18. 10.3390/ma1814335110.3390/ma18143351 ↗
19. 10.1016/0921-5093(95)09780-510.1016/0921-5093(95)09780-5 ↗
20. 10.3390/aerospace1004033210.3390/aerospace10040332 ↗
21. 10.1088/1361-651X/aa841c10.1088/1361-651X/aa841c ↗
22. 10.1016/j.proeng.2011.04.38510.1016/j.proeng.2011.04.385 ↗
23. 10.1038/nmat470910.1038/nmat4709 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.mtcomm.2025.11441210.1016/j.mtcomm.2025.114412 ↗
25. Rouxzeta VAN Der Merwe S, Ahmed Desai D, Campbell Snedden G, et al (2024) Aircraft turbine fan casing and ballistic fan blade impact. Geometry and material. Heliyon 10(2): e24157.
26. 10.1177/1056789521103649110.1177/10567895211036491 ↗
27. Saltelli A, Ratto M, Andres T, et al. (2008) Global sensitivity analysis. The primer. In: Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer. Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470725184.
28. 10.1177/1464420722113612610.1177/14644207221136126 ↗
29. 10.1038/s41598-024-58568-910.1038/s41598-024-58568-9 ↗
30. Sinha SK, Dorbala S (2008) Dynamic Loads in the Fan Containment Structure of a Turbofan Engine. Journal Of Aerospace Engineering 323: 1–14.
31. 10.22226/2410-3535-2021-3-267-27210.22226/2410-3535-2021-3-267-272 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.04.18310.1016/j.jallcom.2019.04.183 ↗
33. 10.1038/s41598-026-35044-010.1038/s41598-026-35044-0 ↗
34. 10.3390/ma1702031710.3390/ma17020317 ↗
35. 10.1007/s11012-019-01051-x10.1007/s11012-019-01051-x ↗
36. 10.1016/j.ijplas.2014.10.00310.1016/j.ijplas.2014.10.003 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.08.25510.1016/j.jmrt.2023.08.255 ↗
38. 10.3390/aerospace1105033310.3390/aerospace11050333 ↗
39. 10.3390/aerospace1104028510.3390/aerospace11040285 ↗
40. 10.3390/met1006070510.3390/met10060705 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2023.10449310.1016/j.ijimpeng.2023.104493 ↗
42. 10.1080/02670836.2019.170968810.1080/02670836.2019.1709688 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.cja.2012.12.00110.1016/j.cja.2012.12.001 ↗
44. 10.3390/met1411119910.3390/met14111199 ↗
45. 10.3390/aerospace1108062910.3390/aerospace11080629 ↗
46. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2017.12.01210.1016/j.ymssp.2017.12.012 ↗
47. 10.3390/ma1706138210.3390/ma17061382 ↗
48. 10.1002/adem.20240183710.1002/adem.202401837 ↗