0
Research Papers

Failure Analysis of Composite-Based Lightweight Multimaterial Joints in Tensile-Shear Tests After Cyclic Heat at High-Relative Humidity

[+] Author and Article Information
Kaori Sakai

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Fastening and Joining Research Institute (FAJRI),
Oakland University,
Rochester, MI 48309
e-mail: ksakai@oakland.edu

Sayed A. Nassar

Fellow ASME
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Fastening and Joining Research Institute (FAJRI),
Oakland University,
Rochester, MI 48309
e-mail: Nassar@oakland.edu

Manuscript received October 31, 2015; final manuscript received July 25, 2016; published online October 19, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Wayne Cai.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 139(4), 041007 (Oct 19, 2016) (9 pages) Paper No: MANU-15-1543; doi: 10.1115/1.4034888 History: Received October 31, 2015; Revised July 25, 2016

Failure analysis of tensile-shear tested bonded composite-based single lap joints (SLJs) that have been subjected to two different levels of cyclic environmental loading is provided. Each test joint has at least one composite adherend which is made of glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP); the second adherend may be aluminum, magnesium, or GFRP composite, and structural epoxy adhesive is used to join two adherends together for creating test joints. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) and energy dispersive spectrometry (EDS) are utilized to investigate the root cause failure of fractured surfaces that gives an insight into the recently published data that showed a significant effect of the cyclic heat on the static load transfer capacity (LTC) of the same SLJs. The SEM and EDS inspections show that the failure mode shifts from interfacial adhesive failure (ADH) to fiber tear (FT) for the GFRP/GFRP joints that have been exposed to cyclic heat with and without high relative humidity as compared to that at ambient condition. Further, failure analysis and discussion are provided.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Brockmann, W. , 2009, Adhesive Bonding: Materials, Applications and Technology, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany.
FAA, 2012, “ Chapter 7 Advanced Composite Materials,” Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC.
Adhesives.org and Sealants.org, 2008, “ Health–Safety,” Adhesive and Sealant Council, Bethesda, MD, accessed on May 31, 2016, Adhesives.org
Wah, T. , 1973, “ Stress Distribution in a Bonded Anisotropic Lap Joint,” ASME J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 95(3), pp. 174–181. [CrossRef]
Chen, W. T. , and Nelson, C. W. , 1979, “ Thermal Stress in Bonded Joints,” IBM J. Res. Dev., 23(2), pp. 179–188. [CrossRef]
Bowditch, M. R. , 1996, “ The Durability of Adhesive Joints in the Presence of Water,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., 16(2), pp. 73–79. [CrossRef]
Wylde, J. W. , and Spelt, J. K. , 1998, “ Measurement of Adhesive Joint Fracture Properties as a Function of Environmental Degradation,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., 18(4), pp. 237–246. [CrossRef]
Sancaktar, E. , and Gomatam, R. , 2001, “ A Study on the Effects of Surface Roughness on the Strength of Single Lap Joints,” J. Adhes. Sci. Technol., 15(1), pp. 97–117. [CrossRef]
Apalak, M. K. , and Engin, A. , 2003, “ An Investigation on the Initiation and Propagation of Damaged Zones in Adhesively Bonded Lap Joints,” J. Adhes. Sci. Technol., 17(15), pp. 1889–1921. [CrossRef]
Aydin, M. D. , Özel, A. , and Temiz, Ş. , 2005, “ The Effect of Adherend Thickness on the Failure of Adhesively-Bonded Single-Lap Joints,” J. Adhes. Sci. Technol., 19(8), pp. 705–718. [CrossRef]
Hu, P. , Han, X. , Li, W. D. , Li, L. , and Shao, Q. , 2013, “ Research on the Static Strength Performance of Adhesive Single Lap Joints Subjected to Extreme Temperature Environment for Automotive Industry,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., 41, pp. 119–126. [CrossRef]
Goglio, L. , Rezaei, M. , and Rossetto, M. , 2012, “ Moisture Degradation of Open-Faced Single Lap Joints,” J. Adhes. Sci. Technol., 28(14–15), pp. 1382–1393.
Nassar, S. A. , and Sakai, K. , 2015, “ Effect of Cyclic Heat, Humidity, and Joining Method on the Static and Dynamic Performance of Lightweight Multi-Material Single Lap Joints,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 137(5), p. 051026. [CrossRef]
Sakai, K. , and Nassar, S. , 2015, “ Failure Analysis of Adhesively Bonded GFRP Single Lap Joints after Cyclic Environmental Loading,” American Society of Composites, East Lansing, MI, Sept. 28–30, Paper No. 1820.
Strongwell, 2013, “ Extren: Fiberglass Structural Shapes and Plate,” Strongwell, Bristol, VA.
Diaz, A. D. , 2012, “ Predicting Failure Initiation in Structural Adhesive Joints,” AFOSR/IO, Arlington, VA.
Loctite, 2004, “ Technical Data Sheet,” Loctite Hysol® Product E-20HP, Henkel, Rocky Hill, CT.
Potter Industries, 2015, “ Spacer Beads Data Sheet,” Potters Industries LLC, Valley Forge, PA.
ASTM, 2010, “ Standard Test Method for Apparent Shear Strength of Single-Lap-Joint Adhesively Bonded Metal Specimens by Tension Loading (Metal-to-Metal),” American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, Standard No. ASTM D1002.
Wang, Y. , 2014, “ The Effect of Peeling Rate and Peeling Angle on the Peeling Strength,” Thesis, University of Akron, Akron, OH.
Davis, M. J. , and Bond, D. A. , 2012, “ The Importance of Failure Mode Identification in Adhesive Bonded Aircraft Structures and Repairs,” July 20, Paper No. 1056.
Kalpakjian, S. , and Schmid, S. R. , 2000, Manufacturing Engineering and Technology, 4th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Baldan, A. , 2012, “ Adhesion Phenomena in Bonded Joints,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., 38, pp. 95–116. [CrossRef]
Hart-Smith, L. J. , 1983, “ Designing to Minimize Peel Stresses in Adhesive-Bonded Joints,” Delamination and Debonding of Materials, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of a test SLJ

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Two-dimensional profiles of adherend surface: (a) surface of GFRP adherend, (b) surface of magnesium adherend, and (c) surface of aluminum adherend

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Cyclic temperature and constant relative humidity profiles: (a) environmental condition 2 and (b) environmental condition 3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schematic of tensile shear test set up

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Photographed images of fractured surfaces following the LTC testing with each environmental effect

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Selected SEM images of fractured surfaces following the LTC testing with each environmental effect for (a) baseline and (b) cyclic heat only, and (c) cyclic heat and RH 85% effect

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Sample EDS spectra measured at selected area of fractured surfaces following LTC testing for: (a) baseline and (b) cyclic heat and RH 85% effect

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

FEA peel stress on bond line versus axial location: GFRP/GFRP joint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

FEA peel stress on bond line versus axial location: GFRP/magnesium joint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

FEA peel stress on bond line versus axial location: GFRP/aluminum joint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

FEA shear stress on bond line versus axial location: GFRP/GFRP joint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

FEA shear stress on bond line versus axial location: GFRP/magnesium joint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

FEA shear stress on bond line versus axial location: GFRP/aluminum joint

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In