Assessment of tensile behavior and failure mechanism in the two integrated composite joints
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract In order to study tensile behavior and failure mechanism of the integrated composite joints of the skin, the longeron and the frame in fuselage structure, the adhesively bonded (joint A) and the mechanically fastened (joint B) integrated composite joints were designed and manufactured. Tensile tests were performed for both joints. The strain versus load curves and the load versus displacement curves were measured, analyzed and compared. It is shown that the first drop load and the ultimate failure load of joint A are 120.82kN and 168.11kN, respectively. While the first drop load and the ultimate failure load of joint B are 41.05kN and 68.22kN. The finite element models for both joints had been established to simulate and analyze failure mechanisms, interlaminar damage behaviors and effects of design parameters on mechanical properties. The dominant failure modes are delamination and interface debonding, which caused by the weak interlaminar strength between joint components. Damage initiation of joint A occurs at the corner bend region of the corner-stiffened laminate around the filler, and then propagates along the radius bend region of the corner-stiffened laminate, and finally leads to the interface debonding and the delamination in the interface of both stiffeners of joints. Damage initiation and propagation occurred at the center of the skin and the L-stiffened laminates of joint A. While for joint B, damage initiation and propagation of the corner-stiffened laminates and the L-stiffened laminates were changed because of the holes. The strength of joint A is two times higher than that of joint B, whether the stacking sequence and the thickness changes or not.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Composite Structure Analysis and Optimization · Fatigue and fracture mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Hygrothermal effects on mode II interlaminar fracture toughness of co-bonded and secondary bonded composites joints10.1002/pc.25176 ↗
2. Progressive failure analysis of laminated composite plates with two serial pinned joints10.1080/15376494.2012.761302 ↗
3. S. Freitas, S. Jos. Failure analysis of adhesively-bonded skin-to-stiffener joints: Metal–metal vs. composite–metal. Eng Fail Anal. 56 (2015) 2-13. http:// doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal. 2015.05.023.10.1016/j.engfailanal.2015.05.023 ↗
4. Evaluation of tensile properties of a composite-metal joint with a novel metal insert design by experimental and numerical methods10.1016/j.cja.2017.03.016 ↗
5. Failure prediction of composite sandwich L-joint under bending10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.05.022 ↗
6. The investigation of the tensile behaviors of single L-joint type bonded with adhesive and rivet10.1002/mawe.201700091 ↗
7. Experimental and numerical analysis of transverse stitched T-joints in bending10.1016/S0263-8223(00)00006-4 ↗
8. C. Luo, J. Xiong. Static Pull and Push Bending Properties of RTM-made TWF Composite Tee-joints. Chinese J Aeronaut. 25 (2012) 198-207. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S1000-9361(11) 60379-8.10.1016/S1000-9361(11)60379-8 ↗
9. High-performance bio-inspired composite T-joints10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.107840 ↗
10. On the assessment of the load-bearing capacity of Z-pinned composite T-joint under out-of-plane tension10.1177/0731684417722409 ↗
11. T. Koh, S. Feih, A. Mouritz. Strengthening mechanics of thin and thick composite T-joints reinforced with z-pins. Compos Part A-Appl S. 43 (2012) 1308-1317. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.compositesa.2012.03.023.10.1016/j.compositesa.2012.03.023 ↗
12. Composites affordability initiative. 41st Structures
13. Composites affordability initiative - Phase I: concept design maturation. 39th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures
14. On the flexural behaviour of GFRP beams obtained by bonding simple panels: An experimental investigation10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.04.039 ↗
15. Analysis and design improvement of composite bolted pi-joints under bending load
16. M. May, O. Hesebeck. Failure of adhesively bonded metallic T-joints subjected to quasi-static and crash loading. Eng Fail Anal. 56 (2015) 454-463. http://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.engfailanal. 2014.12.007.10.1016/j.engfailanal.2014.12.007 ↗
17. X. Li, X. Cheng, Y. Cheng, et al. Tensile properties of a composite–metal single-lap hybrid bonded/bolted joint. Chinese J Aeronaut. 2020. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cja.2020.03.042.10.1016/j.cja.2020.03.042 ↗
18. Investigation of static and dynamic failure behaviour of composite T-joints
19. M. May, G. Ganzenmüller, J. Wolfrum, et al. Analysis of composite T-joint designs for enhanced resistance to hydrodynamic ram. Compos Struct. 125, 2015. 188-194. http://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.02.012.10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.02.012 ↗
20. R. Trask, S. Hallett, F. Helenon, et al. Influence of process induced defects on the failure of composite T-joint specimens. Compos Part A-Appl S. 43, 2012, 748-757. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.compositesa.2011.12.021.10.1016/j.compositesa.2011.12.021 ↗
21. A study of structural composite tee joints in small boats10.1177/002199839002400604 ↗
22. Numerical and experimental investigation into failure of T700/bismaleimide composite T-joints under tensile loading10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.04.019 ↗
23. Influence of web/flange reinforcement on the GFRP bonded beams mechanical response: A comparison with experimental results and a numerical prediction10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.03.043 ↗
24. Adhesive and composite failure prediction of single-L joint structures under tensile loading10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2004.02.005 ↗
25. Delamination damage analyses of FRP composite spar wingskin joints with modified elliptical adhesive load coupler profile10.1007/s10443-008-9067-1 ↗
26. S. Yan, X. Zeng, A. Long. Meso-scale modelling of 3D woven composite T-joints with weave variations. Compos Sci Technol. 171 (2019) 171-179. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.compscitech. 2018.12.024.10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.12.024 ↗
27. N. Zimmermann, P. Wang. A review of failure modes and fracture analysis of aircraft composite materials. Eng Fail Anal. 115 (2020) 104692. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.engfailanal. 2020.104692.10.1016/j.engfailanal.2020.104692 ↗
28. T. Zhang, D. Zhang, G. Wang, et al. Flexural property of novel composite Pi-joint. Aerosp Mater Technol. 45 (2015) 114-117. https://doi.org/10. 3969/ j. issn. 1007-2330. 2015. 04. 026.
29. Mechanical performance of carbon-glass hybrid composite joints in quasi-static tension and tension-tension fatigue10.1016/j.engfailanal.2020.104730 ↗
30. K. Tserpes, S. Pantelakis, V. Kappatos. The effect of imperfect bonding on the pull-out behavior of non-crimp fabric Pi-shaped joints. Comp Mater Sci. 50 (2011) 1372-1380. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.commatsci.2010.05.012.10.1016/j.commatsci.2010.05.012 ↗
31. J. Fan, X. Cheng, S. Wang, et al. Experimental and numerical investigation of composite bolted pi-joint subjected to bending load. Compos Pt B-Eng. 78 (2015) 324-330. http://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.03.094.10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.03.094 ↗
32. Experimental determination of the structural properties and strengthening mechanisms of z-pinned composite T-joints10.1016/j.compstruct.2011.03.009 ↗
33. On the delamination and debond suppression in structural joints by Z-fibre pinning10.1016/j.compositesa.2006.06.013 ↗
34. L. Liu, M. Cai, X. Geng, et al. Assessment of the load carrying performance of composite cross joints. J Compos Mater. 54 (2020) 1431-1439. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/00219983 19881486.10.1177/0021998319881486 ↗
35. Failure criteria for unidirectional fiber composites10.1115/1.3153664 ↗
36. A fatigue failure criterion for fiber reinforced materials10.1177/002199837300700404 ↗
37. Progressive damage modeling in fiber-reinforced materials10.1016/j.compositesa.2007.01.017 ↗
38. Influence of the cohesive law shape on the composite adhesively-bonded patch repair behaviour10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.01.056 ↗
39. L. Fernández, I. Ivañez, S. Sanchez, et al. Effect of adhesive thickness and overlap on the behavior of composite single-lap joints. Mech Adv Mater Struc. (2019) 1-10. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/15376494.2019.1639086.
40. Parametric study of adhesive joints with composites10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2012.01.019 ↗
41. Comparison of failure modes and damage mechanisms of CFRP and C/C composite joints under out-of-plane loading
42. Hibbit · 2014