An all-composite out-of-plane adhesively bonded π joint is an effective structural connector for integrated aircraft structures. Its application can not only enable both the weight and assembly cost benefits, but also enhance the load-carrying capability. In composite π joints, the π shaped overlaminate is a significant kernel and thus attracts more attention of designers. With progressive damage analyses, the influences of π overlaminates with different configurations, lay-ups and geometric dimensions on the mechanical behaviors of composite π joints are obtained. The failure mechanisms and final failure loads of composite π joints with different π overlaminates are compared to provide more knowledge for the optimal design of such joints. Final failure loads stemmed from the static tensile experiments and physical failure phenomena of three types of π joints are presented. The good agreements between the numerical and experimental results not only validate the effectiveness of the numerical models, but also give evidence of the predicted tendency of strength improvement for composite π joints.
Butler B. Composites affordability initiative. In: 41st AIAA structures, structural dynamics & materials conference, Denver, 3–6 April 2000, p.1379.
2.
Taylor RM and Owens SD. Correlation of an analysis tool for 3-D reinforced bonded joints on the F-35 joint strike fighter. In: 45th AIAA structures, structural dynamics & materials conference, Palm Springs, California, 19–22 April 2004, p.1562.
3.
Forster E, Clay S, Holzwarth R, et al. Flight vehicle composite structures. In: 26th congress of international council of the aeronautical sciences including the 8th AIAA aviation technology, integration, and operations (ATIO) conference, Anchorage, Alaska, 14–19 September 2008, p.8976.
4.
Sheahen P, Schmidt R, Holcombe T, et al. Primary sandwich structure: A unitized approach. In: 41th AIAA structures, structural dynamics & materials conference and exhibit, Atlanta, 3–6 April 2000.
5.
KumariSSinhaPK. Effects of transverse stitching and hygrothermal environment on composite wing T-joints. J Reinf Plast Comp2003; 22: 1705–1728.
6.
WangXMXieFYLiM. Influence of tool assembly schemes and integral molding technologies on compaction of T-stiffened skins in autoclave process. J Reinf Plast Comp2010; 29: 1311–1322.
7.
ShenoiRAHawkins. Influence of material and geometry variations on the behavior of bonded tee connections in FRP ships. Composites1992; 23: 335–345.
8.
HawkinsGLHolnessJWDodkinsAR. The strength of bonded tee joints in FRP ships. Plast Rubber Compos1993; 19: 279–284.
9.
Dulieu-SmithJMShenoiRAReadPJCL. Thermoelastic stress analysis of a GRP tee joint. Appl Compos Mater1997; 4: 283–303.
10.
BlakeJIRShenoiRAHouseJ. Progressive damage analysis of tee-joints with viscoelastic inserts. Compos Part A-Appl S2001; 32: 641–653.
11.
RisplerARStevenGPTongL. Failure analysis of composite T joints including inserts. J Reinf Plast Comp1997; 16: 1642–1658.
12.
KumariSSinhaPK. Finite element analysis of composite wing T joints. J Reinf Plast Comp2002; 21: 1561–1585.
13.
VijayarajuKMangalgiriPDDattaguruB. Experimental study of failure and failure progression in T-stiffened skins. Compos Struct2004; 66: 227–234.
14.
DharmawanFThomsonRSLiH. Geometry and damage effects in a composite marine T-joint. Compos Struct2004; 66: 181–187.
15.
FeihSShercliffHR. Adhesive and composite failure prediction of single-L joint structures under tensile loading. Int J Adhesion Adhesives2005; 25: 47–59.
16.
FeihSShercliffHR. Composite failure prediction of sing-L Joint structures under bending. Compos Part A Appl S2005; 36: 381–395.
17.
ElaldiFColakL. Buckling and post-buckling behavior of compression loaded composite panels with hat stiffeners. J Reinf Plast Comp2009; 28: 2501–2509.
18.
ZhaoLBQinTLShenoiRA. Strength prediction of composite π joint under tensile load. J Compos mater2010; 44: 2759–2778.
19.
ZhaoLBQinTLHuangH. Model investigation on composite failure prediction of joint structures. Rare Metal Mater Engg2009; 38: 105–108.
20.
FuYZhangJYZhaoLB. Strength prediction of composite π joint under bending load and study of geometric and material variations effects. J Compos Mater2013; 47: 1029–1038.
21.
Zhao LB, Li JX, Qin TL, et al. Analysis of composite adhesive-bonded joints. In: 17th international conference on composite materials, Edinburgh, 27–31 July 2009.
22.
ZhangJYFuYZhaoLB. Tensile strength prediction of woven composite bonded joint. Adv Mater Res2010; 139–141: 59–62.
23.
QinTLZhaoLBHuangH. Damage investigation and design of woven composite bonded joint. Key Engng Mater2010; 417–418: 861–864.
24.
MoncadaAMChattopadhyayABednarcykBA. Micromechanics-based progressive failure analysis of composite laminates using different constituent failure theories. J Reinf Plast Comp2012; 31: 1467–1487.
25.
ApalakZGApalakMKGencMS. Progressive damage modeling of an adhesively bonded composite Progressive damage modeling of an adhesively bonded composite. J Reinf Plast Comp2007; 26: 903–953.
26.
GoswamiS. A finite element investigation on progressive failure analysis of composite bolted joints under thermal environment. J Reinf Plast Comp2005; 24: 161–171.
27.
LiuSGuanZDGuoX. Edgewise compressive performance of repaired composite sandwich panels – experiment and finite element analysis. J Reinf Plast Comp2013; 32: 1331–1347.
28.
OuinasDAchourBBouiadjraBB. The optimization thickness of single/double composite patch on the stress intensity factor reduction. J Reinf Plast Comp2013; 32: 654–663.
29.
CartieDDRDell'AnnoGPoulinE. 3D reinforcement of stiffener-to-skin T-joints by Z-pinning and tufting. Engg Fract Mech2006; 73: 2532–2540.
