Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Composites: Part B
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Towards optimization of patch shape on the performance of bonded

composite repair using FEM
M. Ramji , R. Srilakshmi, M. Bhanu Prakash
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Engineering Optics Lab, Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Hyderabad 502 205, India

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 8 March 2012
Received in revised form 18 May 2012
Accepted 17 July 2012
Available online 23 August 2012
Keywords:
Bonded composite repair
A. Carbon ber
B. Fracture
C. Finite element analysis (FEA)

a b s t r a c t
Composite repair is gaining importance for extending the service life of aging aircrafts. There are many
parameters like patch thickness, patch layup conguration and patch shape inuencing the performance
of composite repair. Therefore a need exists to prioritize them. In this work a 3-D nite element analysis
has been conducted to get an optimum composite patch shape applied on an inclined center cracked
panel, repaired by symmetrical patch. The patch shapes considered are circle, rectangle, square, ellipse
and octagon. Also SIF reduction is compared for the same volume of patch. It is observed that extended
octagonal patch shape performs better in case of SIF reduction.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Integrity enhancement of damaged structures through composite repair is attracting considerable engineering attention in recent
years. In particular lot of application is in aerospace sector where
extension of service life is of primary interest from an economic
perspective. Repair involving composite patch applied to cracked
metallic sheets is done using either mechanical fastening or adhesive bonding. Mechanical fasteners introduce stress concentration
there by reducing the residual strength of the repaired plate. Adhesively bonded composite patch have been shown to provide high
levels of bond durability under the operating conditions. It also offers an efcient method for enhancing the structural integrity
which includes stiffening of under-designed regions, increasing
static strength, restoring strength or stiffness and reducing stress
intensity factor (SIF) [1]. Further, composite laminates have high
directional stiffness, high failure strain, durability under cyclic
loading, low density and excellent formability. Therefore, it is preferred over isotropic patches which are predominantly made of
metal [1]. Adhesively bonded repair of aircraft structures has been
initiated by Baker in the early 1970s [1]. Two kinds of patch work
are generally employed in composite repair: single sided (un-symmetrical) and double sided (symmetrical). Mostly double sided
patch work is preferred as more reduction in SIF is seen [2]. There
Corresponding author. Address: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian
Institute of Technology Hyderabad, ODF Campus, Yeddumailaram, Medak Dist.,
Hyderabad 502 205, India. Tel.: +91 040 23 01 6078; fax: +91 040 23 01 6032.
E-mail address: ramji_mano@iith.ac.in (M. Ramji).
1359-8368/$ - see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.07.049

are many parameters like patch thickness, patch layup and patch
shape which inuences the performance of the repair. From the literature, it is identied that patch shape plays a major role in repair
performance. Over the last two decade, a paradigm shift has happened in computational mechanics especially in the area of nite
element method (FEM) and its application has penetrated into
every engineering discipline. A detailed review of application of
FEM to composite repair is available in the literature [312]. Umamaheswar and Singh [3] performed nite element based study of
single sided patch repairs applied to thin aluminum sheets. They
showed the SIF variation through the thickness of the panel assuming a straight crack front.
Mahadesh Kumar and Hakeem [4] conducted the numerical
analysis for optimum patch shape in case of symmetric repair of
center cracked panel. They have used different patch shapes such
as circular, elliptical and rectangular and have estimated SIF reduction. But their work dealt with only mode I crack problem. Brighenti [5] has developed the optimum design procedure for repair
using genetic algorithm. He showed that patch shapes signicantly
affects the fracture and fatigue life of double sided repaired components. Chukwujekwu Okafor et al. [6] developed a nite element
model for analyzing the stress distribution of cracked plates repaired with a single sided octagonal patch. They have studied in
detail the stress distribution in the skin, patch and adhesive layer.
Albedah et al. [7] have conducted nite element analysis to estimate SIF for single and double sided repairs having a circular patch
shape. They have compared the mass gain for both the cases. Recently, Rachid et al. [8] have found that the H shape patch performs
better than the rectangular patch. They also concluded that the H

711

M. Ramji et al. / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

Table 1
Material properties.

a
b
c

Material

Exa (GPa)

Ey, Ez (GPa)

txyb, txz

tyz

Gxyc, Gxz (GPa)

Gyz (GPa)

Aluminum
Adhesive
Carbon/epoxy

73.1
4.59
135

0.3
0.47
0.3

0.02

E Youngs modulus.
t Poissons ratio.
G Shear modulus.

Fig. 1. Geometry of the repair model having square patch symmetrical patch (a) front view, and (b) side view (all dimensions are in mm).

shape patch with arrow head improves the performance of the

bonded repair. But they considered only mode I crack for their
analysis. Bachir Bouiadjra et al. [9] have carried out the nite element analysis to compare the repair performance of patches with
rectangular and trapezoidal shapes applied to mode I problem.
They concluded that the trapezoidal patch shape works far better
than the rectangular patches up to certain crack length. All these
above works have been exclusively carried out for mode I problem
and none addresses the repair of mixed mode cracked panel. Hosseini-Toudeshky et al. [10] have carried out experimental investigation for single sided repaired panels containing inclined center
crack. Also they did FEM simulation of fatigue crack growth for a
single sided repaired panel. But they have not studied impact of
patch shape on the repair performance. Recently, Ramji et al.
[11,12] have investigated that in the case of an unsymmetrical
patch, there is no signicant impact of patch shape on SIF reduction for mixed-mode problem.

In this work FEM based study of optimum patch shape applied

to mixed mode cracked panel is carried out under linear elastic
fracture mechanics (LEFM) frame work. Only static analysis has
been performed. Different patch shapes like circle, rectangle,
square, ellipse, and octagon are considered. Comparison of the performance of bonded repair is done by analyzing SIF reduction at
the crack tip. Only double sided patch model is considered in this
work. It is found that extended octagonal and rectangular patch
shape perform better for mixed mode problem.

2. Technological and mechanical challenges in patch repair

The adhesively bonded repair to the metallic structure allows
the restoration of strength and stiffness of the structure, as well
as slowing crack growth by reducing SIF. Application of bonded
composite repair technology is challenging from both the scientic

Fig. 2. Estimation of KI/KII ratio (a) two coincident nodes near the crack tip before loading, and (b) two nearest nodes near the crack tip after loading.

712

M. Ramji et al. / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

Fig. 3. Finite element model of cracked panel (a) entire panel, and (b) zoomed
portion around the crack tip.

and engineering point of view, in particular repair of primary and

secondary load bearing aircraft structures. This is because composite repair technology involves interdisciplinary inputs from several
elds such as aerodynamic loading, stress analysis, ber composite
manufacturing, structural adhesive bonding, fracture mechanics

and fatigue. In general composite repair can be broadly classied

into passive and active repair. Over last two decades only passive
patch repair work has been studied and currently researchers are
working on the active patch repair study involving smart materials
[13]. The role of active smart patches made of piezoelectric actuators has been explored for active restoration of the repaired structures by introducing a local moment/force in opposite sense
thereby reducing the SIF [14]. These piezoelectric patches are
transversely isotropic by nature and it can be adhesively bonded.
Still, this technology is explored at the lab scale and more work
needs to be done for making it to certication stage. Till date, composite repair is mainly carried out on defective secondary load
bearing structures and not on primary one. The technological challenge for the next decade will be on application of composite repair
to defective primary load bearing structures. Because the application of bonded composite repairs to cracked primary structures is
generally acceptable only on the basis of continuous monitoring
of patch performance to ensure that the load transfer is maintained
and also able to monitor damage growth in the parent/patch material. In case of composite patch damages like delamination, matrix
cracking, and ber pull out. should be detected and prevent further
catastrophic failures. Therefore, a suitable non-destructive testing
system should be devised for continuous online monitoring. The
active patch material can also be used as sensors for predicting failures in the repaired system with slight adjustment utilizing their
sensitivity to electro-mechanical coupling [13].
From the mechanical standpoint, two major challenges exist;
rstly, proper adhesion/bonding of the patch on the defective panel

Fig. 4. Finite element model of composite repair model having patches of different shapes (a) circular, (b) rectangular, (c) square, (d) elliptical, (e) regular octagon, and (f)
extended octagon.

M. Ramji et al. / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

713

Fig. 5. Comparison of analytical SIF variation through the thickness with the numerical values from FEM for the center cracked panel having an inclined crack at b = 45.

surface and secondly selection of appropriate adhesive. For better

adhesion a good surface preparation is required and various techniques such as etching, shot peening or sand blasting are cited in
the literature [1]. Depending upon nature of adhesive and panel
surface, appropriate surface preparation techniques should be employed. A lot of research is currently going on in this direction for
better surface preparation. Secondly, the choice of adhesive and its
thickness plays a major role on the integrity aspect and supposedly
it is the weakest link. Adhesives are generally classied as brittle,

intermediate and ductile [15]. Depending upon the combination

of parent and patch material one can choose the kind of adhesive.
In this work the patch is bonded symmetrically to the panel using
AV138/HV998 adhesive material. This adhesive is highly stiff and
brittle in nature having a very high elastic modulus [15] (see Table 1). The maximum shear strength of the brittle adhesive
AV138 is 30 MPa and yield strength is 25 MPa [16]. Normally the
upper limit of the interface strength can be taken as 30 MPa for
the modeling behavior for doing damage propagation studies.

Fig. 6. Variation of SIF and factor R with the diameter D of circular patch (a) KI, (b) KII, and (c) R.

714

M. Ramji et al. / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

Fig. 7. Variation of SIF and factor R against rectangular patch size B or H (a) KI, (b) KII, and (c) R.

Lastly, the adhesive thickness inuences the strength of the joint as

the load is transferred from the base metal to the patch via the
adhesive. Thin adhesive layers are better than the thick layers because it gets the patch to be softer. But thickness provides good
durability to the entire patch as thick adhesive layer attracts lesser
strains. Good adhesive bonds are produced only in the range of
thickness 0.1250.25 mm [6] and in the present modeling the
adhesive thickness (ta) is taken as 0.1 mm which is just sufcient
to transfer the load.
3. Geometry and material properties
The typical model for the cracked specimen is shown in Fig. 1.
The panel is made of aluminum alloy 2014 T6 having the dimension of 160  39  3.175 mm3. It contains an inclined center crack
2a of length 10 mm. The panel thickness (ts) is taken as 3.175 mm.
The crack is inclined at an angle of b = 45 with the horizontal as
shown in Fig. 1. The plate is subjected to an uni-axial load of
15 kN (r = 121.11 MPa). The patch material is made of unidirectional carbon/epoxy composite laminate better known as carbon ber reinforced plastic (CFRP). Later, isotropic patch having the
same property as parent metal is also employed for overall comparison. The layer thickness of the laminate is taken as 0.375 mm
and being four layered the patch thickness is (tp). The patch is
bonded symmetrically to the panel using AV138/HV998 adhesive
material. The general material properties of aluminum panel, composite patch and adhesive are given in Table 1. The composite

patch properties are taken from the Ref. [4]. The specimen dimensions follow the ASTM E-647 standard and it is taken from Ref.
[10]. The effectiveness of patch depends on the stiffness ratio
which is nothing but the ratio of patch stiffness to the panel stiffness (Eptp/Ests). Normally the recommended stiffness ratio ranges
from 1 to 1.6 as mentioned in Ref. [6]. In this study the stiffness ratio is around 1 and it would denitely reinforce the panel at the defect area helping in more load transfer happening across the defect
thereby reducing SIF at the crack tip. Being a symmetric patch repair maximum strengthening would happen surrounding the defect area.

4. Fracture analysis
In this analysis, it is assumed that the crack-front remains perpendicular to the panels surface lying on a plane and therefore
mode-III SIF is neglected. The SIF are deduced from J-integral using
equation as given below:

J K 2I =E0 K 2II =E0

where E0 is modulus of elasticity, E0 = E for plane stress conditions

and E0 = E/(1  m2) for plane strain condition. In case of three dimensional analysis, plane strain condition is considered for estimating
SIF [10]. The J-integral value is evaluated using domain integral
method [17] as shown in the following equation:

M. Ramji et al. / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

715

Fig. 8. Variation of SIF and factor R with the size b of square patch (a) KI, (b) KII, and (c) R.

Z 

Wn1  rij nj


@ui
ds
@xi

The ratio of KI over KII is evaluated as mentioned in Ref. [10] and

is shown below:

K I Duy

K II Dux

where Dux is the horizontal displacement and Duy is the normal

displacement between two closest nodes (see Fig. 2). The relative
displacements are evaluated between loading and unloaded state.
5. Finite element modeling
5.1. Modeling of the cracked panel
FEM is the most effective tool for computing SIF in 3D fracture
models. In this work modeling and analysis is done using ANSYS
12.1 software which is a commercially available nite element
package. To capture the high stress gradient existing at crack tip,
a very ne meshing has been done around the tip as mentioned
in Ref. [12]. In the present analysis the radial extent of the outer
most nodes is 0.8766t and the crack tip element size is 0.0005t.
The crack tip mesh has a total of 7128 elements (36 circumferential, 33 radial; six elements through the thickness) around the

crack tip region. Outside the disk, structured area mesh is created
and later all the areas are extruded in thickness direction to generate volume. Finally, all the generated volumes are meshed with 20noded solid-186 element through sweep mode as shown in Fig. 3a
and the zoomed portion of the crack tip is shown in Fig. 3b. The panel, patch and adhesive are modeled with 20-noded solid elements
as per the dimensions shown in Fig. 1. In the thickness direction,
the panel is meshed with six elements, adhesive with two elements and patch with four elements. Mesh surrounding the crack
tip alters with respect to the patch shape considered. A tensile load
of 15 kN is being applied as a pressure load of 121.11 MPa on the
top surface of the panel. The bottom face is arrested in x and ydirection and the mid plane nodes of the panel are constrained
in z-direction. Then J-integral values for the unrepaired panel is directly obtained from the ANSYS software using domain integral approach [17]. From the J-integral values KI and KII are estimated as
explained in previous section.
5.2. Modeling of the repaired panel
As patch is made of composite laminate having different layup
orientation, the layer angles are dened by assigning element coordinate system to each layer of the patch [18]. Every layer is assigned one element in thickness direction. In this work circular,
rectangular, square, elliptical, and octagonal patches having

716

M. Ramji et al. / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

Fig. 9. Variation of SIF and factor R with major axis 2a for elliptical patch (a) KI, (b) KII, and (c) R.

different areas are modeled and analyzed upfront. All the patches
are centered with respect to the panel and bonded above the crack.
In this analysis the composite patch with bers oriented parallel to
the loading direction is considered. It is observed from our earlier
study that the unidirectional laminate with 90 layup angle (oriented parallel to loading direction) gives highest reduction of SIF
at the crack tip as compared to the other layup angle for a double
sided repair of inclined crack panel [12]. As the repair panel is subjected to in-plane tensile load, the maximum principal stresses
eld is along the loading direction and therefore the axes of the
CFRP patch is kept along the maximum principal stress eld as it
provides more stiffness in the loading direction. Fig. 4 shows the
nite element model of the symmetrically repaired panel having
different patch shapes.

is also studied by maintaining constant patch height (H) as 25 mm

and varying its width (B) as 26, 28, 30 and 32 (all are in mm). The
corresponding areas are 650, 700, 750 and 800 (in mm2). Similar to
circular patch model around the crack tip a circular mesh pattern is
created and then encompassed with in another circular area. Finally, a rectangular area is built around it as shown in Fig. 4b. Finally,
each area is meshed individually.

5.2.1. Circular patch

In this study circle of four different radii is considered and they
are 12.5, 14, 15 and 16 (in mm) corresponding to an area of 490,
616, 706 and 804 (in mm2) respectively. Firstly, around the crack
tip a circular mesh pattern is created. Encompassing the circular
pattern another circular area is created, so that it encloses the circular patch area sufciently. Finally, each area is meshed individually as shown in Fig. 4a.

5.2.4. Elliptical patch

Elliptical patch area is generated by appropriately scaling the
circular area. In this work two cases are considered: rstly horizontal ellipse, having the major axis along x-axis and secondly rotated
ellipse where major axis is along y-axis. In this work the minor axis
of the ellipse is taken as 25 mm and four different major axis
lengths of 26, 28, 30 and 32 (all are in mm) are considered. The corresponding areas are 510, 550, 589 and 629 (in mm2). The meshing
is done similar to that of circular patch model (see Fig. 4d).

5.2.2. Rectangular patch

Two possible models are studied in case of rectangular patch.
Firstly maintaining a constant width (B) of 25 mm and varying
patch height (H). They are varied as 26, 28, 30 and 32 (all are in
mm) leading to four different cases. Similarly an opposite scenario

5.2.3. Square patch

Square patch is also modeled same as rectangular patch with
side length varying as 22, 24, 26, 28 (all are in mm) having areas
rounded to 490, 616, 706 and 804 (in mm2) respectively. The
meshing is also done similar to that of rectangular patch model
(see Fig. 4c).

5.2.5. Octagonal patch

The octagon is created by circumscribing circle with radius R
which is shown in Fig. 4e. For the rst case a regular octagon is
considered having sides of length 10.3, 11.5, 12.4, 13.25 (all are

M. Ramji et al. / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

717

Fig. 10. Variation of SIF and factor R with the distance d for regular and extended octagonal patches (a) KI, (b) KII, and (c) R.

in mm) circumscribed within the circle radii of 12.5, 14, 15 and

16 mm respectively. The corresponding areas are 517, 648, 744
and 848 (in mm2). For the second case, extended octagon is created
by increasing two parallel sides length in such a way that the area
of extended and regular octagon is kept same. But the corners are
chamfered at 45. For this model meshing is done similar to the
rectangular patch model (see Fig. 4f).
It is assumed that patch is perfectly bonded to the panel by
adhesive. Appropriately the nodes are coupled at the respective
interfaces to reect the perfectly bonded behavior. During coupling, all the three degrees of freedom are coupled at each node.
Similar boundary condition as mentioned in the previous sub-section is applied on the repaired panel too. Later, SIFs are estimated
using the same approach as discussed previously.
6. Results and discussions
6.1. Comparison of analytical and numerical SIF of the cracked panel
Fig. 5 shows the SIF distribution through the thickness of the
panel having inclined center crack at 45. In this work, both analytical SIF [19] and numerical values (from FEM) is being compared. In
case of numerical SIF distribution, one can see that there is a reduction of KI at edge and it peaks at the center of the panel while KII is
higher at the edges and it reduces at the center of the panel. This
variation at the free edge is because of the corner singularity effect
[20]. The order of corner singularity is different from the crack tip

singularity. It is also shown that the SIF obtained is very close to

analytical SIF, conrming the adequacy of the mesh considered.
Thus similar kind of mesh is considered for further analysis.
6.2. SIF reduction parameter
For quantitative estimation of effective patch shape for the
mixed mode cracked panel a parameter R is introduced which is
dened in the following equation:

v
u2
!2
!2 3
u
U
R
K UII  K RII 5
u4 K I  K I
Rt
K UI
K UII

where K UI and K UII represents unrepaired mode I and mode II SIF value, K RI and K RII represents mode I and mode II SIF value for the repaired model. This parameter combines both mode I and mode II
SIF reduction into one value so that comparison becomes easier
and straight forward. Higher the R value, better the patch performance with respect to SIF reduction. For comparison purpose SIF
and R value at the mid-plane location is considered.
6.2.1. Circular patch
Fig. 6 shows the variation of KI, KII and R with respect to the
diameter D of circular patch. From Fig. 6a and b it can be observed
that as the diameter of patch increases, overlapping area increases
hence SIF decreases. Same trend is also seen in Fig. 6c, where R

718

M. Ramji et al. / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

Fig. 11. Comparison of SIF variation for different patch shapes with respect to the crack inclination angle b (a) KI, (b) KII, and (c) R.

value increases with patch diameter as more load transfer by patch

happens with increased area. Hence, patch having maximum permissible area is preferred in the case of circular shape.
6.2.2. Rectangular patch
Fig. 7 shows the variation of KI, KII and R with respect to size of
the rectangular patch. From Fig. 7a it can be observed that for xed
height and increasing width of rectangle KI gets lowered and KII becomes greater. For the other case, xed width and increasing
height of rectangle KII gets lowered and KI becomes greater (see
Fig. 7b). Looking at Fig. 7c it can be found that R is higher for the
rectangular patch with xed width and increasing height. Hence
it can be concluded that rectangular patch with larger height performs better as compared to the one with larger width. Because
stiffness offered by a lengthier patch along loading direction is
greater compared to the one in the width direction.
6.2.3. Square patch
Fig. 8 shows the variation of KI, KII and R with the size of square
patch. From Fig. 8a and b it is evident that as the size of patch increases, overlapping area increases hence SIF decreases similar to
that of circular patch. Also the R value increases with increasing
patch area as shown in Fig. 8c similar to that of circular patch model behavior.
6.2.4. Elliptical patch
Two forms of elliptical patch shape are considered. One with the
major axis along x-axis (horizontal ellipse) and other with the
major axis along y-axis (rotated ellipse). Fig. 9 shows the variation

of KI, KII and R with respect to increasing major axis length while
maintaining a xed minor axis length. Looking at Fig. 9a and b, it
can be found that for rotated ellipse KI is higher and KII gets reduced with increasing major axis length. The behavior of elliptical
patch is similar to that of rectangular patch. From Fig. 9c it can be
observed that R is higher for the rotated elliptical patch. The stiffness offered by rotated elliptical patch along loading direction is
more as compared to the horizontal one.
6.2.5. Octagonal patch
Fig. 10 shows the variation of KI, KII and R values with respect to
distance between two parallel sides (d). Looking at Fig. 10a and b it
can be seen that KI is higher whereas KII is lower in case of extended octagon as the distance d of octagon increases and vice versa in case of regular octagon. From Fig. 10c it can be observed that
R is higher for the extended octagonal patch shape compared to
regular octagonal patch shape. Hence extended octagonal shape
is preferred.
6.3. Performance of different patch shapes on panel having different
crack inclination angles
In this section the inuence of patch shape on SIF reduction for
different inclined cracks are analyzed for a xed patch area of
804 mm2, corresponding to the circle of radius 16 mm. Fig. 11
shows the variation of SIF (KI and KII) and R at the mid plane location for different crack inclination angles. By closely observing
Fig. 11a one can see that KI is maximum at b = 0 and is minimum
at b = 90. The reason for this is that at b = 0 there is a maximum

719

M. Ramji et al. / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

Fig. 12. Variation of SIF and factor R with the patch area for different patch shapes (a) KI, (b) KII, and (c) R.

crack opening displacement whereas at b = 90 it is nil. It is also observed that for a double sided patch there is a signicant reduction
of KI for the square, rectangular and octagonal patch shapes. From
Fig. 11b it can be seen that KII is maximum at 45 and zero at crack
angles b = 0 and 90. On overall observation there is bigger reduction in SIF with the rectangular and extended octagonal patches.
Fig. 11c shows the variation of R with different crack inclination
angles. At b = 90 the SIF is nil hence R is not considered for this
case. It is found that R is maximum at all the inclination angles
in case of extended octagon and rectangular patch shape. On careful observation of Fig. 11, one can surely state that patch shape
inuences SIF and its impact is different for different crack inclinations. Therefore one needs to do a trade off for arriving at an optimum patch shape. The subsequent sub-section of manuscript deals
with the patch performance against xed patch volume.
6.4. Comparative study of different patch shapes on SIF reduction
In the previous Section 6.2, we have studied the effect of SIF
reduction for various possibilities within a given patch shape.

Based on that study certain patch shapes are chosen. In this section
a comparative study is done among those chosen patch shape to
identify the best performing shape for the mixed mode cracked panel with crack inclination angle of 45. In this section authors have
carried out a detailed study on the inuence of patch shape on SIF
reduction maintaining same volume. Three different patch areas
are considered: 804, 706 and 616 (in mm2) and they correspond
to the circle of radius 16, 15 and 14 (in mm) respectively. The patch
thickness is kept same and all the patch shapes are arrived at by
xing only one dimension such as height/major axis length same
as that of circle diameter. From the previous section it is shown
that rectangular patch with greater height performs better than
the one with greater width. Hence the rectangular patch with
greater height than width is considered here. Square patch is also
considered having similar areas with an exception that length is
not same as that of circle diameter. Similarly rotated ellipse and
extended octagon are chosen as they perform better compared to
their counter parts. Fig. 12 shows the variation of SIF at mid plane
location with respect to area for all the patch shape considered.
Looking at Fig. 12a and b it can be observed that the SIF is

Table 2
Comparison of R value with different patch shapes for different patch areas.
Patch area in mm2

Circular

Rectangular

Square

Rotated elliptical

Extended octagon

616
706
804

0.9940
1.0085
1.0202

1.0084
1.0217
1.0337

1.0063
1.0205
1.0310

0.9964
1.0111
1.0205

1.0077
1.0229
1.0388

720

M. Ramji et al. / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 710720

Table 3
Comparison of R value with different patch material for octagonal and rectangular
patches.
Patch shape in mm2

Patch is same as parent panel material

CFRP patch

Extended octagon
Rectangle

0.94
0.93

1.04
1.03

decreasing with increasing patch area because load transfer by

patch increases with increasing patch area. In Fig. 12c, R value is
compared against the patch area for different patch shapes. It is
found that extended octagonal patch is more efcient in terms of
SIF reduction followed closely by rectangular patch. Compared to
rectangular patch extended octagonal patch performs better because its width is more for a given area compared to the rectangular patch and load transfer is kept away from the crack tip. Also in
most of the repair work researchers [1,2,6] have preferred extended octagonal patch shape in their study which further
strengthens our prediction. Also the sharp corners are avoided in
the extended octagonal patch making it more resistant against
debonding as compared to the rectangular patch. Table 2 gives
the comparison of R value obtained for different patch shapes.
From Table 2 it is clearly evident that on overall comparison extended octagonal patch has the highest R value and therefore it
is preferred for mixed-mode cracked panel. The performance of
rectangular patch (having greater height) is also comparable to extended octagonal patch but from debonding perspective octagon is
preferred. First limitation of this approach is that one cannot arrive
at an optimum patch dimension and secondly it is applicable only
to xed panel size and one cannot generalize it for other panel
dimensions. The optimization of patch dimension such as width,
length and thickness for an extended octagon or rectangular patch
shape needs to be deduced and it is part of future study. In the next
subsection we have considered the overall comparison of SIF
reduction parameter R for extended octagonal and rectangular
patch shapes obtained with isotropic and CFRP composite patch.
6.5. Comparative study of different patch materials for extended
octagonal and rectangular patch shape
In this section the authors have studied the repair involving an
isotropic patch identical to panel material. It is kept as same as that
of parent material to account for better thermal expansion. Also
the dimensions are kept similar to rectangular and octagonal
patches. Table 3 gives the comparison of R value obtained with different patch materials for octagonal and rectangular patches. From
Table 3 it is observed that the SIF reduction parameter R obtained
for the isotropic patches are lower compared to CFRP patches of
same dimension thereby conrming low reinforcement around
the fault. Therefore, it is of no improvement in using isotropic
patch of same stiffness and also in CFRP patches, bers oriented
parallel to the loading direction leads to high directional stiffness
compared to the isotropic patch. Hence CFRP patch is best when
compared to the isotropic patch.
6.6. Conclusion
A nite element analysis based study has been carried out to
understand the inuence of patch shape on inclined center crack

panel having a crack inclination angle of 45. Five different patch

shapes such as circular, rectangle, square, elliptical and octagonal
are considered. Irrespective of the patch shape in case of double
sided repair there is a drastic reduction in mode I and mode II
SIF value as compared to the unrepaired one. Rectangular patch
shape having greater height has performed better compared to
the one with greater width. On the other hand rotated elliptical
patch has performed better than the horizontal one. Finally in case
of octagonal patch, one with the extended side length has performed well. Also greater the patch area, higher the SIF reduction
because of increased load transfer by the patch. Including the circular and square patch on overall comparison, extended octagon
has performed better showing highest R value. It is closely followed by the rectangular patch shape. Further on overall comparison R is higher for CFRP patch as compared to isotropic extended
octagonal patch having same dimensions. Therefore, extended
octagonal patch shape made of CFRP with maximum permissible
area is recommended in case of repair of inclined cracked panel.

References
[1] Baker AA, Rose LRF, Jones R. Advances in the bonded composite repair of
metallic aircraft structure. Killington: Elsevier Publications; 2002.
[2] Duong
CN,
Wang
CH.
Composite
repair

theory
and
design. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publications; 2007.
[3] Umamaheswar Turaga VRS, Singh Ripudaman. Modelling of a patch repair to a
thin cracked sheet. Eng Fract Mech 1999;62:26789.
[4] Mahadesh Kumar A, Hakeem SA. Optimum design of symmetric composite
patch repair to center cracked metallic sheet. Comp Struct 2000;49:28592.
[5] Brighenti Roberto. Patch repair design optimization for fracture and fatigue
improvements of cracked plates. Int J Solids Struct 2007;44:111531.
[6] Chukwujekwu Okafor A, Singh Navdeep, Enemouh UE, Rao SV. Design, analysis
and performance of adhesively bonded composite patch repair of cracked
aluminium aircraft panels. Comp Struct 2005;71:25870.
[7] Albedah, Bachir Bouiadjra B, Mhamdia R, Benyahia F, Es-Saheb M. Comparison
between double and single sided bonded composite repair with circular shape.
Mater Des 2010;32:9961000.
[8] Rachid Mhamdia, Serier B, Bachir Bouiadjra B, Belhouari M. Numerical analysis
of the patch shape effects on the performances of bonded composite repair in
aircraft structures. Composites Part B Engineering 2011;71:17.
[9] Bachir Bouiadjra B, Fari Bouanani M, Albedah A, Benyahia F, Es-Saheb M.
Comparison between rectangular and trapezoidal bonded composite repairs in
aircraft structures: a numerical analysis. Mater Des 2011;32:31616.
[10] Hosseini-Toudeshky Hossein, Bijan Mohammadi, Hamid Reza Daghyani.
Mixed mode fracture analysis of aluminium repaired panels using composite
patches. Comp Sci Technol 2006;66:18898.
[11] Ramji M, Srilakshmi R, Bhanu Prakash M. Towards an optimum patch design in
composite repair. In: Proceedings of fth ICTACEM conference. Kharagpur,
India; December 2010.
[12] Ramji M, Srilakshmi R. Design of composite patch reinforcement applied to
mixed mode cracked panel using FEA. J Reinf Plast Comp 2012;39(9):58595.
[13] Quan Wang, Nan Wu. A review on structural enhancement and repair using
piezoelectric materials and shape memory alloys. Smart Mater Struct 2012:21.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/21/1/01300.
[14] Wang Q, Quek ST, Liew KM. On the repair of a cracked beam with a
piezoelectric patch. Smart Mater Struct 2002;11:40410.
[15] Da Silva Lucas FM, Ramos JE, Figueiredo MV, Strohaecker TR. Inuence of the
adhesive, the adherend and the overlap on the single lap shear strength. J
Adhes Interface 2006;7(4):19.
[16] Lucas FM, Da Silva RAM, Chousal JAG, Pinto AM. Alternative methods to
measure the adhesive shear displacement in the thick Adherend Shear Test. J
Adhes Sci Technol 2008;22:159.
[17] Ansys version 12.1, Users Documentation, Pennsylvania, US; 2009.
[18] Ever J. Barbero. Finite Element Analysis of Composite Materials. Boca
Raton: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis group; 2008.
[19] Murakami Y. Hand book of stress intensity factors. Tokyo: Pergamon Press;
1987.
[20] Anderson KL. Fracture mechanics fundamentals and applications. Boca
Raton: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis group; 2005.