Fatigue of structural adhesives has been investigated through joints and a little number of works investigate bulk adhesive behaviour itself. Aerospace and automotive engineering focuses more on joint configuration studies, which are correlated with practical applications. Previous works showed that for thin adhesive joints, material properties measured by bulk adhesive testing and joint testing are similar despite the triaxial stress states developing in the adhesive bondlines. However, with the introduction of structural adhesives in construction industry, thicker bondlines have emerged where the bulk adhesive material dominates the joint behaviour. This review work summarises works on the fatigue of bulk structural adhesives used mainly in the construction industry investigating structural adhesives fatigue behaviour either through experiment on joints or on bulk adhesive specimens. The work focuses on thick adhesive bondlines in joints, and discusses the controversy that is over whether adhesive properties from joints or from bulk material should be used.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
FeyPA.History of adhesive bonding. In: AdamsRD, editor. Adhesive bonding, science, technology and applications. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing Ltd; 2005.
2.
SheppardSESweetSSScottJW.The jelly strength of gelatins and glues. J Ind Eng Chem. 1920;12:1007–1011.
3.
HartshornSR.Structural adhesives – chemistry and technology. New York: Plenum; 1986.
4.
BrockmannWGeißPLKlingenJAdhesive bonding, materials, applications and technology. Weinheim, DE: Wiley-VCH; 2009.
SwayzeDL.Adhesives — modern tool of fabrication. SAE Trans. 1946;54:412–417.
7.
AdamsRDWakeWC.Structural adhesive joints in engineering. London, UK: Elsevier; 1986.
8.
Abdel WahabMHilmyIAshcroftIEvaluation of fatigue damage in adhesive bonding: part 1: bulk adhesive. J Adhes Sci Technol. 2010;24(2):305–324.
9.
BurstNAdamsDOGascoigneHE.Investigating the thin-film versus bulk material properties of structural adhesives. J Adhes. 2011;87(1):72–92.
10.
Hart-SmithLJ.Adhesive bonding of aircraft primary structures. SAE Trans. 1980;89(4):3718–3732.
11.
SwallowJC.The plastics industry. J R Soc Arts. 1951(99);4843:335–381.
12.
VassilopoulosAP.The history of fiber-reinforced polymer composite laminate fatigue. Int J Fatigue. 2020;134:105512.
13.
HarrisB.Fatigue and accumulation of damage in reinforced plastics. Composites. 1977;8(4):214–220.
14.
SunCChimE.Fatigue retardation due to creep in a fibrous composite. In: KN Lauraitis, editor. Fatigue of fibrous composite materials, STP723. Conshohocken, PA, USA: ASTM International West; 1981.
15.
CourtneyTHWulffJ.Matrix-limited fatigue properties in fibre composite materials. J Mater Sci. 1966;1(4):383–388.
16.
ShihGEbertL.The effect of the fiber/matrix interface on the flexural fatigue performance of unidirectional fiberglass composites. Compos Sci Technol. 1987;28(2):137–161.
17.
SarfarazRVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Experimental investigation of the fatigue behavior of adhesively-bonded pultruded GFRP joints under different load ratios. Int J Fatigue. 2011;33(11):1451–1460.
18.
SarfarazRVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Experimental investigation and modeling of mean load effect on fatigue behavior of adhesively-bonded pultruded GFRP joints. Int J Fatigue. 2012;44:245–252.
19.
ZhangYVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Fracture of adhesively-bonded pultruded GFRP joints under constant amplitude fatigue loading. Int J Fatigue. 2010;32(7):979–987.
20.
ShahverdiMVassilopoulosAPKellerT.A total fatigue life model for the prediction of the R-ratio effects on fatigue crack growth of adhesively-bonded pultruded GFRP DCB joints. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf. 2012;43(10):1783–1790.
21.
Abdel WahabM.Fatigue in adhesively bonded joints: a review. ISRN Mater Sci. 2012: 746308.
22.
BernasconiABerettaSMoroniFLocal stress analysis of the fatigue behaviour of adhesively bonded thick composite laminates. J Adhes. 2010;86(5-6):480–500.
23.
SavvilotidouMKellerTVassilopoulosAP.Fatigue performance of a cold-curing structural epoxy adhesive subjected to moist environments. Int J Fatigue. 2017;103:405–414.
24.
RosemeierMKrimmerABardenhagenATunneling crack initiation in trailing-edge bond lines of wind-turbine blades. AIAA J. 2019;57(12):5462–5474.
25.
TaoGXiaZ.Biaxial fatigue behavior of an epoxy polymer with mean stress effect. Int J Fatigue. 2009;31:678–685.
26.
TaoGXiaZ.Fatigue behavior of an epoxy polymer subjected to cyclic shear loading. Mater Sc Eng: A. 2008;486:38–44.
27.
TaoGXiaZ.Ratcheting behaviour of an epoxy polymer and its effect on fatigue life. Polym Test. 2007;26:451–460.
28.
WangG-TLiuH-YSaintierNCyclic fatigue of polymer nanocomposites. Eng Fail Anal. 2009;16:2635–2645.
29.
ManjunathaCMTaylorACKinlochAJThe cyclic-fatigue behavior of an epoxy polymer modified with micron-rubber and nano-silica particles. J Mater Sci. 2009;44:4487–4490.
30.
BroutmanLJGaggarSK.Fatigue behavior of epoxy and polyester resins. Int J Polym Mater Polym Biomater. 1972;1:295–316.
31.
AndrewsEHWalkerBJ.Fatigue fracture in polyethylene. Proc Royal Soci London. 1971;325(1560):57–79.
32.
NielsenLE.Fatigue behavior of some filled polymers. J Compos Mater. 1975;9(2):149–156.
33.
StammesENijssenRPLWestphalT.Static and fatigue tests on resin for wind turbine rotor blades. 14th European Conference on Composite Materials; ECCM14, Budapest, 7–10 June, 2010.
34.
KinlochAJ.Adhesion and adhesives: science and technology. London, UK: Springer-Science+Business Media,B.V; 1987.
35.
MaysGCHutchinsonAR.Adhesives in civil engineering. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1992.
36.
SimsSA.Applications of resins in bridge and structural engineering. Int J Cem Compos Lightweight Concrete. 1985;7:225–232.
37.
MichelsJSena-CruzJCzaderskiCStructural strengthening with prestressed CFRP strips with gradient anchorage. J Compos Constr. 2013;17:651–661.
38.
KumarPPatnaikAChaudharyS.A review on application of structural adhesives in concrete and steel-concrete composite and factors influencing the performance of composite connections. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2017;77:1–14.
ReisingRMWSharoozBMHuntVJClose look at construction issues and performance of four fiber-reinforced polymer composite bridge decks. J Compos Constr. 2004;8(1):33–42.
41.
ZarouchasDNijssenRPL.Mechanical behaviour of thick structural adhesives in wind turbines blades under multi-axial loading. J Adhes Sci Technol. 2016;30(13):1413–1429.
42.
De GoeijWVan ToorenMBeukersA.Composite adhesive joints under cyclic loading. Mater Design. 1999;20(5):213–221.
43.
EN 1991-2 Eurocode 1. Actions on structures – Part 2: traffic loads on bridge. European committee for standardization. 2003.
44.
LahuertaFWestphalTNijssenRPLStatic and fatigue performance of thick laminates test design and experimental compression results. 16th European Conference on Composite Materials; ECCM16, Seville, Spain, 22–26 June 2014.
45.
JarryEShenoyRA.Performance of butt strap joints for marine applications. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2006;26:162–176.
46.
AntoniouAVespermannMSayerFLife prediction analysis of thick adhesive bond lines under variable amplitude fatigue loading. 18th European Conference on Composite Materials; ECCM18, Athens, Greece, 24–28 June, 2018.
47.
SayerFPostNvan WingerdeATesting of adhesive joints in the wind industry. EWEC 2009, The European wind energy Conference and Exhibition; Marseille, France, 16–19 March, 2009.
48.
JørgensenJB.Adhesive joints in wind turbine blades. DTU Wind Energy DTU Wind Energy PhD. 2017;79. doi:10.11581/DTU:00000027.
49.
HeX.Effect of mechanical properties of adhesives on stress distributions in structural bonded joints. Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2010 Vol II; WCD 2010, June 30–July 2, 2010, London.
50.
ASTM D907-15. Standard terminology of adhesives. West Conshohocken (PA): ASTM International; 2015.
51.
ASTM D1002-10(2019). Standard test method for apparent shear strength of single-lap-joint adhesively bonded metal specimens by tension loading (metal-to-metal). West Conshohocken (PA): ASTM International; 2019.
52.
BolgerJC.Structural adhesives: today’s state of the art. In: SchnebergerGL, editor. Adhesives in manufacturing. New York, USA: Marcel Dekker; 1983.
53.
MaheriMRAdamsRD.Determination of dynamic shear modulus of structural adhesives in thick adherend shear test specimens. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2002;22(2):119–127.
54.
SavvilotidouMVassilopoulosAPFrigioneMDevelopment of physical and mechanical properties of a cold-curing structural adhesive in a wet bridge environment. Constr Build Mater. 2017;144:115–124.
55.
SarfarazRVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Block loading fatigue of adhesively bonded pultruded GFRP joints. Int J Fatigue. 2013;49:40–49.
56.
ImanakaMLiuXKimotoM.Comparison of fracture behavior between acrylic and epoxy adhesives. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2017;75:31–39.
57.
JeandrauJP.Intrinsic mechanical characterization of structural adhesives. Int J Adhes Adhes. 1986;6(4):229–231.
LillehedenL.Mechanical properties of adhesives in situ and in bulk. Int J Adhes Adhes. 1994;14:31–37.
60.
KatnamKStevensonJStanleyWTensile strength of two-part epoxy paste adhesives: influence of mixing technique and micro-void formation. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2011;31:666–673.
61.
ZhengSAshcroftI.A depth sensing indentation study of the hardness and modulus of adhesives. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2005;25:67–76.
62.
LeesDHutchinsonA.Mechanical characteristics of some cold-cured structural adhesives. Int J Adhes Adhes. 1992;12(3):197–205.
63.
BaneaMDda SilvaLFM.Adhesively bonded joints in composite materials: an overview. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part J: J Eng Tribol. 2009;223(1):1–15.
SharpeLH.The interphase in adhesion. J Adhes. 1972;4(1):51–64.
66.
FolettiAIMSena CruzJVassilopoulosAP.Fabrication and curing conditions effects on the fatigue behavior of a structural adhesive. Int J Fatigue. 2020;139:105743.
67.
MishnaevskyLBrannerKPetersenHNMaterials for wind turbine blades: An overview. Materials (Basel). 2017;10:1285. doi:10.3390/ma10111285.
68.
BidaudP.Analysis of the cyclic behavior of an adhesive in an assembly for offshore windmills applications. Mater Université Bretagne Occidentale, HAL archives-ouvertes.fr. 2014.
69.
KimS-W-RKangW-RJeongM-SDeflection estimation of a wind turbine blade using FBG sensors embedded in the blade bonding line. Smart Mater Struct. 2013;22:125004.
70.
FernandezGVandepitteDUsabiagaHStatic and cyclic strength properties of brittle adhesives with porosity. Int J Fatigue. 2018;117:340–351.
71.
GriffinDAMalkinMC.Lessons learned from recent blade failures: primary causes and risk-reducing Technologies. 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition; 4-7 January 2011, Orlando, Florida.
72.
WetzelKK.Defect-Tolerant structural design of wind turbine blades. 50th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference; 4–7 May 2009, Palm Springs, California.
73.
BrannerKBerringP. Methods for testing of geometrical down-scaled rotor blades. DTU Wind Energy. DTU Wind Energy E, No. 0069, 2014.
74.
MishnaevskyLBrøndstedPNijssenRPLMaterials of large wind turbine blades: recent results in testing and modelling. Wind Energy. 2012;15:83–97.
75.
McGuganMPereiraGSørensenBFDamage tolerance and structural monitoring for wind turbine blades. Philos Trans Royal Soci Math, Phys Eng Sci. 2015;373:20140077.
76.
MarshallSJBayneSCBaierRA review of adhesion science. Dent Mater. 2010;26(2):e11–e16.
HollawayL.A review of the present and future utilisation of FRP composites in the civil infrastructure with reference to their important in-service properties. Constr Build Mater. 2010;24(12):2419–2445.
XuXCrocombeADSmithPA.Fatigue crack growth rates in adhesive joints tested at different frequencies. J Adhes. 1996;58:191–204.
83.
VassilopoulosAP.Fatigue and fracture of adhesively-bonded composite joints. Amsterdam, NL: Woodhead Publishing; 2014.
84.
BrunnerAJ.Investigating the performance of adhesively-bonded composite joints: standards, test protocols and experimental design [M]. In: VassilopoulosAP, editor. Fatigue and fracture of adhesively-bonded composite joints. Woodhead Publishing; 2014.3-42.
85.
EderMABitscheRDNielsenMA practical approach to fracture analysis at the trailing edge of wind turbine rotor blades. Wind Energy. 2014;17:483–497.
86.
PascoeJAZavattaNTroianiEThe effect of bondline thickness on fatigue crack growth rate in adhesively bonded joints. Eng Fract Mech. 2020;229:106959.
87.
AzariAPapiniMSpeltJK.Effect of adhesive thickness on fatigue and fracture of toughened epoxy joints – part I: experiments. Eng Fract Mech. 2011;78:153–162.
88.
ChaiH.On the correlation between the mode I failure of adhesive joints and laminated composites. Eng Fract Mech. 1986;24(3):413–431.
89.
MallSRamamurthyG.Effect of bond thickness on fracture and fatigue strength of adhesively bonded composite joints. Int J Adhes Adhes. 1989;9:33–37.
90.
Abou-HamdaMMegahedMHammoudaM.Fatigue crack growth in double cantilever beam specimen with an adhesive layer. Eng Fract Mech. 1998;60(5-6):605–614.
91.
BaneaMDda SilvaLFM.Static and fatigue behaviour of room temperature vulcanising silicone adhesives for high temperature aerospace applications. In: Mat.-wiss. u.Werkstofftech. 2010;41(5):325–335.
92.
KrenkSJönssonJHansenLP.Fatigue analysis and testing of adhesive joints. Eng Fract Mech. 1996;53(6):859–872.
93.
KatsiropoulosCVChamosATserpesKFracture toughness and shear behavior of composite bonded joints based on a novel aerospace adhesive. Compos Part B: Eng. 2012;43(2):240–248.
94.
SchmueserDW.A fracture mechanics approach to characterizing cyclic debonding of varied thickness adhesive joints to electroprimed steel surfaces. J Adhes. 1991;36(1):1–23.
95.
ManshadiBDVassilopoulosAPBotsisJ.A combined experimental/numerical study of the scaling effects on mode I delamination of GFRP. Compos Struct. 2013;83:32–39.
96.
ManshadiBDAshtianiEFBotsisJAn iterative analytical/experimental study of bridging in delamination of the double cantilever beam specimen. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf. 2014;61:43–50.
97.
Farmand-AshtianiECugnoniJBotsisJ.Specimen thickness dependence of large scale fiber bridging in mode I interlaminar fracture of carbon epoxy composite. Int J Solids Struct. 2015;55:58–65.
98.
YaoLCuiHAlderliestenRCThickness effects on fibre-bridged fatigue delamination growth in composites. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf. 2018;110:21–28.
99.
ShahverdiMVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Experimental investigation of R-ratio effects on fatigue crack growth of adhesively-bonded pultruded GFRP DCB joints under CA loading. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf. 2012;43(10):1689–1697.
100.
ShahverdiMVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Mixed-mode fatigue failure criteria for adhesively-bonded pultruded GFRP joints. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf. 2013;54:46–55.
101.
MartinRHMurriGB.Characterization of mode I and mode II delamination growth and thresholds in AS4/PEEK composites. In SP Garbo, editor. ASTM International: ASTM STP 1059; West Conshohocken, PA1990. p. 251–270.
102.
JablonskiD.Fatigue crack growth in structural adhesives. J Adhes. 1980;11(2):125–143.
103.
KhanRAlderliestenRBadshahSEffect of stress ratio or mean stress on fatigue delamination growth in composites: critical review. Compos Struct. 2015;124:214–227.
104.
PascoeJAAlderliestenRCBenedictusR.On the physical interpretation of the R-ratio effect and the LEFM parameters used for fatigue crack growth in adhesive bonds. Int J Fatigue. 2017;97:162–176.
105.
JonesRHuWKinlochAJ.A convenient way to represent fatigue crack growth in structural adhesives. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct. 2015;38(4):379–391.
106.
YaoLAlderliestenRCJonesRDelamination fatigue growth in polymer-matrix fibre composites: A methodology for determining the design and lifing allowables. Compos Struct. 2018;196:8–20.
107.
ShahverdiMVassilopoulosAPKellerT.A phenomenological analysis of mode I fracture of adhesively-bonded pultruded GFRP joints. Eng Fract Mech. 2011;78(10):2161–2173.
108.
RochaAVMAkhavan-SafarACarbasRFatigue crack growth analysis of different adhesive systems: effects of mode mixity and load level. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct. 2020;43:330–341.
109.
NaitoKFujiiT.Static and fatigue crack growth of epoxy adhesives and fractal dimensions. Int J Adhes Adhes. 1998;18(3):199–213.
110.
DessureaultMSpeltJ.Observations of fatigue crack initiation and propagation in an epoxy adhesive. Int J Adhes Adhes. 1997;17(3):183–195.
111.
QuaresiminMRicottaM.Fatigue behaviour and damage evolution of single lap bonded joints in composite material. Compos Sci Technol. 2006;66:176–187.
112.
PotterKDGuildFJHarveyHJUnderstanding and control of adhesive crack propagation in bonded joints between carbon fibre composite adherends I. experimental. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2001;21:435–443.
113.
ZhangZShangJKLawrenceFV.Backface strain technique for detecting fatigue crack initiation in adhesive joints. J Adhes. 1995;49:23–36.
114.
JonesRPittSBunnerAJApplication of the hartman–schijve equation to represent mode I and mode II fatigue delamination growth in composites. Compos Struct. 2012;94:1343–1351.
115.
JonesRBarterSChenF.Experimental studies into short crack growth. Eng Fail Anal. 2011;18:1711–1722.
116.
CrocombeADRichardsonGSmithPA.A unified approach for predicting the strength of cracked and Non-cracked adhesive joints. J Adhes. 1995;49:211–244.
117.
ZhangYVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Stiffness degradation and fatigue life prediction of adhesively-bonded joints for fiber-reinforced polymer composites. Int J Fatigue. 2008;30(10-11):1813–1820.
118.
Hart-SmithLJ.Developments in adhesives-2. Kinloch, A. J., Ed.London: Applied Science Publishers; 1981.
119.
RamírezFMGde MouraMFSFMoreiraRDFA review on the environmental degradation effects on fatigue behaviour of adhesively bonded joints. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct. 2020;43(7):1307–1326.
120.
ZhangYVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Effects of low and high temperatures on tensile behavior of adhesively-bonded GFRP joints. Compos Struct. 2010;92(7):1631–1639.
121.
ZhangYVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Environmental effects on fatigue behavior of adhesively-bonded pultruded structural joints. Compos Sci Technol. 2009;69(7-8):1022–1028.
122.
BeberVSchneiderBBredeM.Influence of temperature on the fatigue behaviour of a toughened epoxy adhesive. J Adhes. 2016;92(7-9):778–794.
123.
HarrisJAFayPA.Fatigue life evaluation of structural adhesives for automotive applications. Int J Adhes Adhes. 1992;12:9–18.
124.
AshcroftIAAbdel WahabMCrocombeADThe effect of environment on the fatigue of bonded composite joints. part 1: testing and fractography. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf. 2001;32:45–58.
125.
CrocombeADRichardsonG.Assessing stress state and mean load effects on the fatigue response of adhesively bonded joints. Int J Adhes Adhes. 1999;19(1):19–27.
126.
PereiraAMReisPNBFerreiraJAM.Effect of the mean stress on the fatigue behaviour of single lap joints. J Adhes. 2015;93(6):504–513.
127.
SarfarazRVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Modeling the constant amplitude fatigue behavior of adhesively bonded pultruded GFRP joints. J Adhes Sci Technol. 2013;27(8):855–878.
128.
VassilopoulosAP, editor. Fatigue life prediction of composites and composite structures – second edition. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead publishing; 2020.
129.
VassilopoulosAPManshadiBDKellerT.Influence of the constant life diagram formulation on the fatigue life prediction of composite materials. Int J Fatigue. 2010;32(4):659–669.
130.
VassilopoulosAPManshadiBDKellerT.Piecewise non-linear constant life diagram formulation for FRP composite materials. Int J Fatigue. 2010;32(10):1731–1738.
131.
BoerstraGK.The multislope model: a new description for the fatigue strengthof glass reinforced plastic. Int J Fatigue. 2007;29(8):1571–1576.
132.
BeheshtyMHHarrisB.A constant life model of fatigue behavior for carbonfiber composites: the effect of impact damage. Compos Sci Technol. 1998;58(1):9–18.
133.
DastinSJLubinG.Adhesive bonding of high modulus composite aircraft structures. SAE Trans. 1971;80(1):379–384.
134.
AdamsRPeppiattN.Stress analysis of adhesive-bonded lap joints. J Strain Anal. 1974;9(3):185–196.
135.
ParkJ-HChoiJ-HKweonJ-H.Evaluating the strengths of thick aluminum-to-aluminum joints with different adhesive lengths and thicknesses. Compos Struct. 2010;92(9):2226–2235.
136.
GrantLDRAdamsRDda SilvaLFM.Experimental and numerical analysis of single-lap joints for the automotive industry. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2009;29:405–413.
137.
SayerFAntoniouAvan WingerdeA.Investigation of structural bondlines in wind turbine blades by sub-component tests. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2012;37:129–135.
138.
SharpKBogdanovichABoyleRWind blade joints based on non-crimp 3D orthogonal woven Pi shape performs. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf. 2013;49:9–17.
139.
BroughtonWRMeraRD. Review of durability test methods and standards for assessing long term performance of adhesive joints. NPL REPORT CMMT(A)61, 1997.
140.
DNVGL-ST-0376.Rotor blades for wind turbines [J]. DNV GL AS; 2015.
141.
FernandezGVandepitteDUsabiagaHExperimental identification of static and dynamic strength of epoxy based adhesives in high thickness joints. Int J Solids Struct. 2017;120:292–303.
142.
TangJHSridharISrikanthN.Static and fatigue failure analysis of adhesively bonded thick composite single lap joints. Compos Sci Technol. 2013;86:18–25.
143.
SamborskyDMandellJSearsAStatic and fatigue testing of thick adhesive joints for wind turbine blades. Proceedings 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition; p. 1550.
144.
SearsATSamborskyDDAgastraPFatigue results and analysis for thick adhesive notched Lap shear test). 51st AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference; 12–15 April 2010, Orlando, Florida.
145.
KavdirEÇAydinMD.The investigation of mechanical properties of a structural adhesive via digital image correlation (DIC) technic. Compos Part B: Eng. 2019;173:106995.
146.
ASTM International D7791-17. Standard test method for uniaxial fatigue properties of plastics. West Conshohocken PA, USA: ASTM International; 2017.
147.
ASTM International D638-14. Standard test method for tensile properties of plastics. West Conshohocken (PA): ASTM International; 2014.
148.
ASTM International D5379/D5379M-12. Standard test method for shear properties of composite materials by the V-notched beam method. West Conshohocken PA, USA: ASTM International; 2012.
149.
ISO 13003:2003(en) Fibre-reinforced plastics — determination of fatigue properties under cyclic loading conditions.
150.
ISO 527-2:2012 plastics — determination of tensile properties — Part 2: test conditions for moulding and extrusion plastics.
151.
ISO 527-4, plastics — determination of tensile properties — Part 4: test conditions for isotropic and orthotropic fibre-reinforced plastic composites.
152.
HagerupE.Flexural fatigue testing of polyesters. J Appl Polym Sci. 1963;7:1093–1116.
153.
KooGPRiddellMNO’TooleJL.Fatigue properties of polytetrafluoroethylene and related fluoropolymers. Polym Eng Sci. 1967;7(3):182–188.
154.
RiddellMN.A guide to better testing of plastics. Plast Eng. 1974;30(4):71–78.
155.
HertzbergRWMansonJA.Environment, frequency and temperature effects on fatigue in engineering plastics. In: BurkeJAWeissV, editors. Fatigue, environmental and temperature effects. New York, USA: Springer; 1983.
156.
SauerJRichardsonG.Fatigue of polymers. Int J Fract. 1980;16(6):499–532.
157.
TakemoriMT.Polymer fatigue. Annu Rev Mater Sci. 1984;14(1):171–204.
158.
Movahedi-RadAVKellerTVassilopoulosAP.Modeling of fatigue behavior based on interaction between time- and cyclic-dependent mechanical properties. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf. 2019;124:105469.
159.
Movahedi-RadAVKellerTVassilopoulosAP.Creep effects on tension-tension fatigue behavior of angle-ply GFRP composite laminates. Int J Fatigue. 2019;123:144–156.
160.
Movahedi-RadAVKellerTVassilopoulosAP.Fatigue damage in angle-ply GFRP laminates under tension-tension fatigue. Int J Fatigue. 2018;109:60–69.
161.
SendeckyjGPStalnakerHD.Effect of time at load on fatigue response of [(0/±45/90)s]2 T300/5208 Graphite-epoxy laminate. Composite Materials: Testing and Design (Fourth Conference), ASTM STP 617; American Society for Testing and Materials, 1977, p. 39–52.
162.
CiardielloRBelingardiGLitterioFThermomechanical characterization of reinforced and dismountable thermoplastic adhesive joints activated by microwave and induction processes. Compos Struct. 2020;244:112314.
163.
BelingardiGBrunellaVMartoranaBThermoplastic adhesive for automotive applications. In: RudawskaA, editor. Adhesives – applications and properties; 2016: 341–362.
164.
SchinkerMKönczölLDöllW.Micromechanics of fatigue crack propagation in glassy thermoplastics. Colloid Polym Sci. 1984;262(3):230–235.
165.
LuZFengBLohC.Fatigue behaviour and mean stress effect of thermoplastic polymers and composites. Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale. 2018;12(46):150–157.
166.
EftekhariMFatemiA.Creep-fatigue interaction and thermo-mechanical fatigue behaviors of thermoplastics and their composites. Int J Fatigue. 2016;91:136–148.
167.
SafaiLCuellarJSSmitGA review of the fatigue behavior of 3D printed polymers. Addit Manuf. 2019;28:87–97.
168.
ZhangHCaiLGolubMAnd fatigue behaviors of 3D-printed. J Mater Eng Perform. 2018;27:57–62.
169.
RiddellMKooGO’TooleJ.Fatigue mechanisms of thermoplastics. Polym Eng Sci. 1966;6(4):363–368.
170.
ConstableIWilliamsJBurnsD.Fatigue and cyclic thermal softening of thermoplastics. J Mech Eng Sci. 1970;12(1):20–29.
171.
SimsiriwongJShresthaRShamsaeiNEffects of microstructural inclusions on fatigue life of polyether ether ketone (PEEK). J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2015;51:388–397.
172.
SaibKEvansWIsaacD.The role of microstructure during fatigue crack growth in poly (aryl ether ether ketone)(PEEK). Polymer (Guildf). 1993;34(15):3198–3203.
173.
ShresthaRSimsiriwongJShamsaeiN.Load history and sequence effects on cyclic deformation and fatigue behavior of a thermoplastic polymer. Polym Test. 2016;56:99–109.
174.
MizobeKHondaTKoikeHRelationship between load, rotation speed and, strength in all-PEEK and PEEK race–PTFE retainer hybrid polymer bearings under dry rolling contact fatigue. Proceedings Advanced Materials Research; Trans Tech Publ, p. 66–70.
175.
MellottSRFatemiA.Fatigue behavior and modeling of thermoplastics including temperature and mean stress effects. Polym Eng Sci. 2014;54(3):725–738.
176.
BerrehiliACastagnetSNaY.Multiaxial fatigue criterion for a high-density polyethylene thermoplastic. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct. 2010;33(6):345–357.
177.
ZhouYMallickP.Fatigue performance of an injection molded talc-filled polypropylene. Polym Eng Sci. 2005;45(4):510–516.
178.
UnverOSittiM.Flat dry elastomer adhesives as attachment materials for climbing robots. IEEE Trans Robot. 2010;26(1):131–141.
179.
KwonJCheungEParkSFriction enhancement via micro-patterned wet elastomer adhesives on small intestinal surfaces. Biomed Mater. 2006;1(4):216–220.
180.
TyczkowskiJKrawczyk-KłysIKuberskiSChemical nature of adhesion: plasma modified styrene–butadiene elastomer and polyurethane adhesive joints. Eur Polym J. 2010;46(4):767–773.
181.
AlshuthTAbrahamFJerramsS.Parameter dependence and prediction of fatigue properties of elastomer products. Rubber Chem Technol. 2002;75(4):635–642.
182.
KantersMJKurokawaTGovaertLE.Competition between plasticity-controlled and crack-growth controlled failure in static and cyclic fatigue of thermoplastic polymer systems. Polym Test. 2016;50:101–110.
183.
ShenXXiaZEllyinF.Cyclic deformation behavior of an epoxy polymer. part I: experimental investigation. Polym Eng Sci. 2004;44(12):2240–2246.
184.
Movahedi-RadAVKellerTVassilopoulosPA.Interrupted tension-tension fatigue behavior of angle-ply GFRP composite laminates. Int J Fatigue. 2018;113:377–388.
185.
SamborskyDMandellJFMillerDA.Creep/fatigue behavior of resin infused biaxial glass fabric laminates. AIAA SDM Wind Energy Session. 2013.
186.
TaoGXiaZ.An experimental study of uniaxial fatigue behavior of an epoxy resin by a new noncontact real-time strain measurement and control system. Polym Eng Sci. 2007;47(6):780–788.
187.
XiaZShenXEllyinF.Biaxial cyclic deformation of an epoxy resin: experiments and constitutive modeling. J Mater Sci. 2005;40(3):643–654.
188.
TaoGXiaZ.Mean stress/strain effect on fatigue behavior of an epoxy resin. Int J Fatigue. 2007;29(12):2180–2190.
189.
BrunbauerJPinterG.Effects of mean stress and fibre volume content on the fatigue-induced damage mechanisms in CFRP. Int J Fatigue. 2015;75:28–38.
190.
BortzDRMerinoCMartin-GullonI.Carbon nanofibers enhance the fracture toughness and fatigue performance of a structural epoxy system. Compos Sci Technol. 2011;71(1):31–38.
191.
ManjunathaCMTaylorACKinlochAJThe tensile fatigue behavior of a GFRP composite with rubber particle modified epoxy matrix. J Reinforced Plastics Compos. 2010;29:2170–2183.
192.
Barcelos CarneiroMDRI. Numerical and experimental investigation of hygrothermal aging in laminated composites [TUDELFT PhD thesis], 2019.
193.
BeberVFernandesPSchneiderBEffect of notch size on the fatigue damage behaviour of toughened epoxy adhesive specimens. J Adhes. 2017;93(1-2):113–126.
194.
BeberVSchneiderBBredeM.On the fatigue behavior of notched structural adhesives with considerations of mechanical properties and stress concentration effects. Procedia Eng. 2018;213:459–469.
195.
EzehOHSusmelL.Fatigue strength of additively manufactured polylactide (PLA): effect of raster angle and non-zero mean stresses. Int J Fatigue. 2019;126:319–326.
196.
EzehOHSusmelL.On the notch fatigue strength of additively manufactured polylactide (PLA). Int J Fatigue. 2020;136:105583.
197.
ManjunathaCMTaylorACKinlochAJThe tensile fatigue behaviour of a silica nanoparticle-modified glass fibre reinforced epoxy composite. Compos Sci Technol. 2010;70:193–199.
198.
KangM-HChoiJ-HKweonJ-HJCs.Fatigue life evaluation and crack detection of the adhesive joint with carbon nanotubes. Compos Struct. 2014;108:417–422.
199.
ZhouJLucasJP.Hygrothermal effects of epoxy resin. part II: variation of glass transition temperature. Polymer (Guildf). 1999;40:5513–5522.
200.
BroughtonWRDeanGD. Fatigue and creep testing of adhesives and thermoplastic joined systems. Measurement good practice guide No. 104, NPL, 2007.
201.
LuckyramJVardyAE.Fatigue performance of two structural adhesives. J Adhes. 1988;26(4):273–291.
202.
BascomWCottingtonRJonesRThe fracture of epoxy-and elastomer-modified epoxy polymers in bulk and as adhesives. J Appl Polym Sci. 1975;19(9):2545–2562.
203.
ASTM E647-15e1. Standard test method for measurement of fatigue crack growth rates. West Conshohocken (PA): ASTM International; 2015.
204.
AshcroftIASilberschmidtVVEchardBCrack propagation in a toughened epoxy adhesive under repeated impacts. Shock Vib. 2011;18(1-2):157–170.
205.
HilmyIAbdel WahabMAshcroftIAMeasuring of damage parameters in adhesive bonding. Key Eng Mater. 2006;324-325:275–278.
206.
ChenZAdamsRDda SilvaLFM.Fracture toughness of bulk adhesives in mode I and mode III and curing effect. Int J Fract. 2011;167:221–234.
207.
KanchanomaiCRattananonSSoniM.Effects of loading rate on fracture behavior and mechanism of thermoset epoxy resin. Polym Test. 2005;24:886–892.
SrivastavaIKoratkarN.Fatigue and fracture toughness of nanocomposites. JOM. 2010;62:50–57.
212.
BrillhartMGregoryBBotsisJ.Fatigue fracture behaviour of PEEK: 1. Effects of load level. Polymer (Guildf). 1991;32(9):1605–1611.
213.
BrillhartMBotsisJ.Fatigue fracture behaviour of PEEK: 2. Effects of thickness and temperature. Polymer (Guildf). 1992;33(24):5225–5232.
214.
BrillhartMBotsisJ.Fatigue crack growth analysis in PEEK. Int J Fatigue. 1994;16(2):134–140.
215.
LoweAKwonO-HMaiY-W.Fatigue and fracture behaviour of novel rubber modified epoxy resins. Polymer (Guildf). 1996;37(4):565–572.
216.
KinlochAJLeeSTaylorA.Improving the fracture toughness and the cyclic-fatigue resistance of epoxy-polymer blends. Polymer (Guildf). 2014;55(24):6325–6334.
217.
SarradoCTuronACostaJOn the validity of linear elastic fracture mechanics methods to measure the fracture toughness of adhesive joints. Int J Solids Struct. 2016;81:110–116.
218.
SobierajMCMurphyJEBrinkmanJGNotched fatigue behavior of PEEK. Biomaterials. 2010;31(35):9156–9162.
219.
HsiehTHKinlochAJTaylorACThe effect of carbon nanotubes on the fracture toughness and fatigue performance of a thermosetting epoxy polymer. J Mater Sci. 2011;46(23):7525–7535.
220.
ZhangWPicuRKoratkarN.The effect of carbon nanotube dimensions and dispersion on the fatigue behavior of epoxy nanocomposites. Nanotechnology. 2008;19(28):285709.
221.
BlackmanBRKKinlochAJSohn LeeJThe fracture and fatigue behaviour of nano-modified epoxy polymers. J Mater Sci. 2007;42:7049–7051.
222.
HwangJ-FMansonJAHertzbergRWFatigue crack propagation of rubber-toughened epoxies. Polym Eng Sci. 1989;29(20):1477–1487.
223.
PelchJRitterJLesserAFatigue resistance of silane-bonded epoxy/glass interfaces using neat and rubber-toughened epoxies. J Mater Sci. 2002;37(15):3269–3276.
224.
JohnsonWSMallS.A fracture mechanics approach to designing adhesively bonded joints. NASA Technical Memorandum 85694; NTIS, Springfield, VA, 1983.
225.
ChenQGuoHAveryKMixed-mode fatigue crack growth and life prediction of an automotive adhesive bonding system. Eng Fract Mech. 2018;189:439–450.
226.
MonteiroJAkhavan-SafarACarbasRInfluence of mode mixity and loading conditions on the fatigue crack growth behaviour of an epoxy adhesive. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct. 2020;43:308–316.
227.
BureauMDi FrancescoEDicksonJMechanical behavior of injection-molded polystyrene/polyethylene blends: fracture toughness vs. fatigue crack propagation. Polym Eng Sci. 1999;39(6):1119–1129.
228.
BrownENWhiteSRSottosNR.Fatigue crack propagation in microcapsule-toughened epoxy. J Mater Sci. 2006;41(19):6266–6273.
229.
AzimiHRPearsonRAHertzbergRW.Fatigue of rubber-modified epoxies: effect of particle size and volume fraction. J Mater Sci. 1996;31:3777–3789.
230.
Karger-KocsisJFriedrichK.Fatigue crack propagation and related failure in modified, andhydride-cured epoxy resins. Colloid Polym Sci. 1992;270(6):549–562.
231.
NeuserSMichaudV.Fatigue response of solvent-based self-healing smart materials. Exp Mech. 2014;54:293–304.
232.
AdamsRDComynJ.Joining using adhesives. Assem Autom. 2000;20(2):109–117.
233.
SarfarazRVassilopoulosAPKellerT.Variable amplitude fatigue of adhesively-bonded pultruded GFRP joints. Int J Fatigue. 2013;55:22–32.
234.
ErpolatSAshcroftICrocombeAA study of adhesively bonded joints subjected to constant and variable amplitude fatigue. Int J Fatigue. 2004;26(11):1189–1196.
235.
ErpolatSAshcroftICrocombeAFatigue crack growth acceleration due to intermittent overstressing in adhesively bonded CFRP joints. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf. 2004;35(10):1175–1183.
