Effect of Autoclave Bonding Pressure and Temperature on Polycarbonate Single Lap Joints with polyurethane adhesive
Source abstract
Abstract
Adhesive joints are good replacement for bolted and welded joints. Adhesive joint performance over the life depends on joint strength. Strength of joint depends upon curing process parameters used during bonding. This study investigates the effect of cure temperature and pressure on the mechanical performance of autoclave-bonded single lap joints (SLJ). Joint load transfer capacity (LTC) data and failure mode analysis are provided. Test joints are made of two polycarbonate lexan adherends that are autoclave-bonded together using aliphatic polyether (Polyurethane) film adhesive (Huntsman PE399). Two levels of cure pressure and cure temperature are investigated, for their effect on joint load transfer capacity, failure mode, and joint stiffness after heat cycling at a low or high level of relative humidity. Experimental results showed higher cure temperature increases joint performance.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Epoxy Resin Curing Processes · Mechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Fastening and Joining Institute (FAJRI), Department of Mechanical Engineering, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA
References (27)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/0261-3069(88)90006-410.1016/0261-3069(88)90006-4 ↗
2. 10.4271/95072410.4271/950724 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2010.05.00210.1016/j.compstruct.2010.05.002 ↗
4. Banea MD · J Mater Des Appl · 2010 · 224 · 51
5. 10.1177/002199831557177310.1177/0021998315571773 ↗
6. Adams RD, Comyn J, Wake WC. Structural adhesive joints in engineering. London: Springer. 1997;359.10.1039/9781847550064-00114 ↗
7. 10.1177/105678951039536310.1177/1056789510395363 ↗
8. Shroeder KJ · Body Assem Manuf · 1994 · 10 · 10
9. 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2008.09.00110.1016/j.ijadhadh.2008.09.001 ↗
10. ASTM D907 · Am Soc Test Mater (ASTM) · 2010
11. 10.1016/S0143-7496(00)00006-310.1016/S0143-7496(00)00006-3 ↗
12. Banea MD · Part L: J Mater Des Appl · 2009 · 223 · 1
13. 10.1177/002199831559553210.1177/0021998315595532 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2016.01.00510.1016/j.ijadhadh.2016.01.005 ↗
15. 10.1002/polb.1071610.1002/polb.10716 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.tafmec.2015.07.00410.1016/j.tafmec.2015.07.004 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2014.01.02210.1016/j.ijadhadh.2014.01.022 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2012.10.01010.1016/j.ijadhadh.2012.10.010 ↗
19. ASTM D1002 · Am Soc Test Mater (ASTM) · 2010
20. Wang Y. The effect of peeling rate and peeling angle on the peeling strength. Thesis. University of Akron. 2014.
21. 10.1186/2196-4351-2-110.1186/2196-4351-2-1 ↗
22. 10.1080/01694243.2012.69739110.1080/01694243.2012.697391 ↗
23. LFM Da Silva · 200810.1007/978-3-540-79056-3 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2011.01.00210.1016/j.ijadhadh.2011.01.002 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.matdes.2010.04.02310.1016/j.matdes.2010.04.023 ↗
26. Goglio L · J Adhes · 2012 · 11 · 807
27. Goglio L · J Adhes · 2014 · 8 · 621