This paper addresses numerical and experimental examination of the role of zigzag interface shapes on the load bearing capacity and fatigue life of adhesively bonded single lap joints. Aluminum adherends with non-flat zigzag interfaces were tested under both quasi-static and fatigue loading conditions. The quasi-static test results revealed that the non-flat adhesive joints have higher load bearing capacity compared to the conventional flat single lap joints. Comparative fatigue tests with different loading levels revealed that the non-flat zigzag single lap joint had considerably higher fatigue life than the conventional lap joint.
Adams RD, Comyn J and Wake WC. Structural adhesive joints in engineering. Springer Science & Business Media, 1997.
2.
BossJGaneshVLimC. Modulus grading versus geometrical grading of composite adherends in single-lap bonded joints. Compos Struct2003; 62: 113–121.
3.
HerSC. Stress analysis of adhesively-bonded lap joints. Compos Struct1999; 47: 673–678.
4.
AyatollahiMRGivANRazaviN, et al.Mechanical properties of adhesively single lap-bonded joints reinforced with multi-walled carbon nanotubes and silica nanoparticles. J Adhes. in press. DOI: 10.1080/00218464.2016.1187069.
5.
EsmaeiliERazaviNBayatM, et al.Flexural behavior of metallic fiber-reinforced adhesively bonded single lap joints. J Adhes. in press. DOI: 10.1080/00218464.2017.1285235.
RazaviNAyatollahiMREsmaeiliE, et al.Mixed mode fracture response of a metallic fiber-reinforced epoxy adhesive. Eur J Mech A2017; 65: 349–359.
8.
Nemati GivAAyatollahiMRRazaviN, et al.The Effect of orientations of metal macrofiber reinforcements on the mechanical properties of adhesively bonded single lap joints. J Adhes. in press. DOI: 10.1080/00218464.2017.1305270.
9.
AyatollahiMRSamariMRazaviN, et al.Fatigue performance of adhesively bonded single lap joints with non‐flat sinusoid interfaces. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct2017; 40: 1355–1363.
10.
Cooper PA and Sawyer JW. A Critical Examination of Stresses in an Elastic Single Lap Joint. Technical Report, NASA-TP-1507, L-12802, 1979.
11.
TongLStevenGP. Analysis and design of structural bonded joints1999. USA: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4615-5133-1.
12.
McLarenAMacInnesI. The influence on the stress distribution in an adhesive lap joint of bending of the adhering sheets. Br J Appl Phys1958; 9: 72–72.
13.
CampilhoRPintoABaneaMD, et al.Strength improvement of adhesively-bonded joints using a reverse-bent geometry. J Adhes Sci Technol2011; 25: 2351–2368.
14.
CostaMVianaGda SilvaLFM, et al.Environmental effect on the fatigue degradation of adhesive joints: a review. J Adhes2017; 93: 127–146.
15.
De GoeijWVan ToorenMBeukersA. Composite adhesive joints under cyclic loading. Mater Des1999; 20: 213–221.
16.
FesselGBroughtonJFellowsN, et al.Fatigue performance of metallic reverse‐bent joints. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct2009; 32: 704–712.
17.
Fessel G, Broughton J, Fellows N, et al. A numerical and experimental study on reverse-bent joints for composite substrates. In: 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference, 2007, p.2192.
18.
YouMLiZZhengXL, et al.A numerical and experimental study of preformed angle in the lap zone on adhesively bonded steel single lap joint. Int J Adhes Adhes2009; 29: 280–285.
19.
Zeng Q and Sun C. A new bonded composite wavy lap joint. In: 41st structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference and exhibit, 2000, p.1484.
20.
ZengQ-GSunC. Novel design of a bonded lap joint. AIAA J2001; 39: 1991–1996.
21.
ZengQSunC. Fatigue performance of a bonded wavy composite lap joint. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct2004; 27: 413–422.
22.
FesselGBroughtonJFellowsN, et al.Evaluation of different lap-shear joint geometries for automotive applications. Int J Adhes Adhes2007; 27: 574–583.
23.
TeixeiraFGda SilvaLFM. Study of influence of substrate topography on stress distribution in structural adhesive joints. J Adhes2011; 87: 671–687.
24.
AshrafiMAjdariARahbarN, et al.Adhesively bonded single lap joints with non-flat interfaces. Int J Adhes Adhes2012; 32: 46–52.
25.
ZavattieriPDHectorLGBowerAF. Determination of the effective mode-I toughness of a sinusoidal interface between two elastic solids. Int J Fract2007; 145: 167–180.
26.
HaghpanahBChiuSVaziriA. Adhesively bonded lap joints with extreme interface geometry. Int J Adhes Adhes2014; 48: 130–138.
27.
RazaviNEsmaeiliESamariM, et al.Stress analysis on a non-flat zigzag interface bonded joint. J Adhes. in press. DOI: 10.1080/00218464.2016.1257942.
28.
RazaviNBertoFPeronM, et al.Parametric study of adhesive joints with non-flat sinusoid interfaces. Theor Appl Fract Mech. in press. DOI: 10.1016/j.tafmec.2017.06.019.
29.
CurleyAHadaviniaHKinlochA, et al.Predicting the service-life of adhesively-bonded joints. Int J Fract2000; 103: 41–69.
30.
EklindAWalanderTCarlbergerT, et al.High cycle fatigue crack growth in mode I of adhesive layers: modelling, simulation and experiments. Int J Fract2014; 190: 125–146.
31.
GongBPaggiMCarpinteriA. A cohesive crack model coupled with damage for interface fatigue problems. Int J Fract2012; 173: 91–104.
32.
ImanakaMIwataT. Effect of adhesive layer thickness on fatigue strength of adhesively bonded butt, scarf and butterfly type butt joints. Int J Fract1996; 80: 69–76.
DIN 53281 (2006-06). Testing of adhesively bonded joints-preparation of test specimens. German Institute for Standardisation, Deutsches Institut für Normung.
35.
JonesRHuWKinlochA. A convenient way to represent fatigue crack growth in structural adhesives. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct2015; 38: 379–391.
36.
Taylor AC. The impact and durability performance of adhesively-bonded metal joints. PhD Thesis, University of London, 1997.
37.
WahabMAAshcroftICrocombeA, et al.Numerical prediction of fatigue crack propagation lifetime in adhesively bonded structures. Int J Fatigue2002; 24: 705–709.
38.
WahabMAAshcroftICrocombeA, et al.Finite element prediction of fatigue crack propagation lifetime in composite bonded joints. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf2004; 35: 213–222.
