CHAPTER 1

INTODUCTION

1.1 General
Use of Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) is gaining acceptance in civil engineering
structures which were otherwise earlier limited to ship and aerospace applications. FRP
plates, rebars, and various shaped FRP sections are now-a-days attractive in the
construction field due to their superior material properties over conventional construction
materials. To reduce the assembly cost and to simplify the manufacturing process, FRP
structures may also be molded with minimum possible pieces. However, the structures cannot
be entirely exempted from the use of joints (connections). The joints used in a FRP laminated
structure can often determine the success or failure of the structure over its years of use.
Joints whether adhesively bonded, mechanical or hybrid, play very significant role to the
overall performance of a FRP structure. As substantial stress concentrations occur in the
joints, generally structural failures initiate also at the joints. So, by means of proper analysis,
understanding the actual behaviour of the FRP joints are very important for the successful
performance of FRP laminated structures.

1.2 Composite Materials

A composite material signifies that two or more materials are combined on a macroscopic
scale to form a useful third material. Using composite material some of the following
properties of material can be improved:

Strength
Fatigue life
Stiffness
Temperature dependent behaviour
Corrosion resistance
Thermal insulation

There are different types of composite materials available for different engineering
applications. Figure describes the outline of different composite materials:

1.2.1 Classification of Composite Material

FRP is a composite material which consists of primarily of two materials, fibers and a resin
matrix. The fibers provide the strength and the resin matrix holds them in place and transfers
the load evenly amongst the fibers. The resin also protects the fibers and bonds them to the
surface, transferring the load from the structure into the fibers.

Fig. 1.1 General composition of FRP

The fibers are usually glass, carbon, basalt or aramid, although other fibers such as
paper or wood or asbestos have been sometimes used. The polymer is usually an epoxy,
vinylester or polyester thermosetting plastic, and phenol formaldehyde resins are still in use.
The two most common fibers used are E-Glass and Carbon Fiber. Epoxy has been found to be
the best resin.

1.2.2 Classification of FRP

Classification made with respect to the matrix constituent material:

Organic Matrix Composites (OMCs)

Polymer Matrix Composites (PMCs)
Carbon matrix composites

Metal Matrix Composites (MMCs)

Ceramic Matrix Composites (CMCs)

Classification made with respect to reinforcement:

Fiber reinforced composites

Continuous fibers
Discontinuous fibers

Laminar reinforced composites

Particulate reinforced composites

Properties of FRP composite materials are presented along with conventional materials in
Table 1.1 for reference, which shows the superiority of material.
Table 1.1: Properties of conventional structural materials and bidirectional fiber
composites

Material

Fiber
vol.
Fraction
(V)
(GPa)

Mild Steel
Aluminium-T4
Aluminium-T6
E-glass-epoxy
57
Carbon
fiber 58
epoxy

Tensile
Modulus
(E)
(GPa)

Tensile
Strength

(GPa)

Density
()
(g/cm)

Specific
Modulus
(E/)

Specific
Strength
(/)

210
73
69
21.5
83

0.45-0.83
0.41
0.26
0.57
0.38

7.8
2.7
2.7
1.97
1.54

26.9
27.0
25.5
10.9
53.5

0.058-0.106
0.152
0.096
0.26
0.24

1.2.3 Applications of Composite Materials

Fiber-reinforced polymers or FRPs include wood (comprising cellulose fibers in a lignin and
hemicellulose matrix), carbon fiber reinforced plastic or CFRP, and glass reinforced plastic or
GRP. If classified by matrix then there are thermoplastic composites, short fiber
thermoplastics, long fiber thermoplastics or long fiber reinforced thermoplastics. There are
numerous thermoset composites, but advances system usually incorporate aramid fiber and
carbon fiber in an epoxy resin matrix.
Composites can also be used in metal fibers reinforcing other metals, as in metal
matrix composites or MMC. Magnesium is often used in MMCs because it has similar
mechanical properties as epoxy. The benefit of magnesium is that it does not degrade in outer
space. Ceramic matrix composites include bone (hydroxyapatite reinforced with collagen
fibers), cermet (ceramic and metal) and concrete. Ceramic matrix composites are built
primarily for toughness, not for strength. Organic matrix/ceramic aggregate composites
include asphalt concrete, asphalt mastic, dental composites, syntactic foam and mother of
pearl .Chobham armour is a special composites used in military applications.
Additionally, thermoplastic composite materials can be formulated with specific metal
powders resulting in materials with density range from 2 g/cm to 11 g/cm (same density as
lead). These material can be used in place of traditional materials such as aluminium,
stainless steel, brass bronze, copper, lead and even tungsten in weighting, balancing, vibration
dampening and radiation shielding applications. High density composites are an
economically viable option when certain materials are deemed hazardous and are banned
(such as lead) or when secondary operation costs (such as machining, finishing, or coating)
are a factor.
Engineering wood includes a wide variety of different products such as plywood,
oriented strand board, wood plastic composite (recycled wood fiber in polythene matrix),
Pykrete (sawdust in ice matrix), plastic-impregnated or laminated paper or textiles, Arborite,
Formica (plastic) and micrata. Other engineered laminate composites, such as Mallite, use a
central core of end grain balsa wood, bonded to surface skins of light alloy or GRP. These
generate low-weight, high rigidity materials.

1.2.4 Products
Composite materials have gained popularity (despite their generally high cost) in high
performance products that need to be light weight, yet strong enough to take harsh loading
conditions such as aerospace components (tails, wings, fuselages, propellers), boat and scull
hulls, bicycle frames and racing car bodies. Other uses fishing rods and storage tanks. The
new Boeing structure including the wings and fuselage is composed largely of composites.
Carbon composite is a key material in today launch vehicles and spacecraft. It is
widely used in solar panel substrates, antenna reflectors and yokes of spacecraft. It is also
used in payload adapters, inter-stage structures and heat shields of launch vehicles.
In 2007 an all composite military high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicle
(HMMWV or HUMMVEE) was introduced by TPI composites Inc and Armor Holdings Inc,
the first all composite vehicle. Composites vehicle is lighter, allowing higher ply-loads. In
2008 carbon fiber and DuPont Kevlar (five times stronger than steel) were combined with
enhanced thermoset resins to make military transit cases by ECS composites creating 30percent lighter cases with high strength. Also in 2008, an all composite recreational vehicle
RV was introduced by pilgrim international Inc. The shell composed of CosmoLite, a
thermoplastic fiber reinforced composite and exterior surface Spectralite which incorporates
DuPont Surlyn, an impact resistant coating found on golf balls.
In 2006, Microcosm Inc. successfully completed qualification test on an all composite
cryogenic LOX tank. In testing done for the Scorpius space Launch Company (SSLC),
Microcosm successfully tested a 42-inch diameter all composite liquid oxygen (LOX) tank to
nearly four times its operating pressure of 550 psi. Testing was done at cryogenic temperature
using liquid nitrogen. The work was done as part of technology development programme for
the Scorpius family of low cost, responsive launch vehicles. Currently, Microcosm Inc. is in
the process of qualifying a cryogenic tank with a MEOP (mean operating pressure) of 1500
psi and a safety factor of 2.0.

1.3

Joints

The types of joints commonly used in FRP composite structures are:

Mechanical joints (such as bolts, pin joints, shear studs or dowels) and
Adhesively bonded joints.

1.4

Mechanical joints in laminated composite

Mechanical joints are an important area of research because of their widespread use for ease
of assembly and disassembly. For traditional materials, mechanical joints are adequate, but,
not well suited to FRP composite materials for various reasons.
1.4.1

Types of mechanical joints

The most commonly used laminated composite mechanical joints are:

Single-lap joints and,
Double-lap joints.

1.5 Adhesively bonded laminated composite joints

Generally, adhesives used with polymer composites display characteristics similar to the
composites they join. Stress-strain characteristics of adhesives are nonlinear, and their
properties are significantly affected by elevated service temperatures and humidity as well as
sustained loadings. Most adhesives display higher compressive and shear capabilities than
tensile and peel strengths. In addition, most display significantly greater shear than tensile
deformations prior to fracture. As a rule, thinner bond lines are preferred for maximum bond
strengths and rigidities. Thinner bond lines are more resistant to cracking when flexed, and
they display less creep. They also display lower residual thermal stresses and have a lower
probability of adverse inclusions.
Although adhesive joints provide a more uniform stress distribution within the joint as
compared to mechanically fastened connections, stress concentrations are still present. The
stress concentrations experienced in a single lap joint are a significant concern in polymer
composites. These stresses can include peeling along the ends of joints, causing an inter
laminar failure in a composite. For this reason, it is preferred that adhesively bonded
composite parts be designed such that they are stressed parallel to their fiber directions.
Maintaining small angle differences between layers of laminates can also minimize the
potential for de-laminations.
6

1.5.1 Types of adhesives for adhesively bonded composite joints

Principal adhesives used to join structural composites include epoxies, polyurethane,
cyanoacrylates, methacrylates and solvent cements (Mosallam 2011). Epoxies are most
commonly employed adhesive for joining composites. They display good strength, versatility
and adhesive properties. Generally, epoxies display good resistance to adverse environmental
conditions and have low shrinkage and creep characteristics. Polyurethanes display high
resistance to impact loads, Cyanoacrylates are fast setting adhesives. Methacrylates offer
significant improvements in strength and toughness, fast cure rates and ability to bond to a
wide variety of adherents.
1.5.2 Adhesively bonded joint configurations
The most commonly used adhesively bonded laminated composite joints are lap joints, scarf
joints and strap joints. Various types of adhesively bonded joint configuration are as shown in
the figure below (Fig. 1.2).

(a) Single-lap bonded joint

(b) Double-lap bonded joint

(c) Single-strap joint

joint

(d) Double-strap

(e) Stepped lap joint

joints

(f) Scarf

Fig. 1.2 Adhesively bonded joint configurations

1.5.3 Typical failure modes in laminated composite adhesive joints

In order to recognize the failure modes in FRP adhesively bonded joints, the guidelines of the
ASTM D5573 classifies the failure modes into seven classes: (1) adhesive failure, (2)
cohesive failure, (3) thin-layer cohesive failure, (4) fiber-tear failure, (5) light-fiber-tear
failure, (6) stock-break failure, and (7) mixed failure. These failure modes are presented in
Figure below (fig.1.3).

Fig. 1.3 Different types of failure modes for adhesively bonded FRP joints
The combination of two or more of the six classes of failure modes as shown in Fig. 1.3 can
produce a mixed failure mode.
8

The adhesive failure occurs by brittle fracture or by a rubbery tearing, depending on the type
of adhesive used. This failure is the rupture of the adhesive bond, such that separation occurs
at the adherent/adhesive interface. An adherentadhesive interface failure occurs on a macroscale from either inadequate surface treatment or material mismatch. Cohesive failure of the
adhesive arises when the load exceeds the adhesive strength. This tends to be a localized
effect, occurring near stress concentrations, generally initiates at ends of the joints.
Interlaminar failure may be caused by poor processing, voids, de-laminations, or thermal
stresses.
1.5.4 Design considerations for adhesively bonded laminated composite joints

The four main loading modes of bonded joints are:

Peel loads - produced by out of plane loads acting on thin adherents.

Shear stresses - produced by tensile, torsional or pure shear loads imposed on

adherents.
Tensile stresses - produced by out of plane tensile loads.
Cleavage loads - produced by out-of-plane tensile loads acting on stiff and
thick adherents at the ends of the joints.

In practice, generally a bonded joint experiences several of these loading components

simultaneously. Adhesively bonded composite joints should be designed such that the
adhesive layers are primarily stressed in shear or compression. Bonded joints are strongest
under these loading conditions. The designer should avoid, or carefully evaluate, bonded
joints that are exposed to high direct tension, cleavage, and peel forces. Fig. 1.4 illustrates the
different stress conditions in a bonded joint.

Fig. 1.4 Types of stress conditions developed in composite bonded joints (Mosallam 2011)

10

Chapter 2
Literature Review
Adhesive bonding is being increasingly used in structural applications. Adhesive bonding is a
material joining process in which an adhesive, placed between the adherent surfaces,
solidifies to produce an adhesive bond. The characteristics of adhesive joints make them
attractive in industries such as aeronautics, automotive and civil engineering. The use of
adhesive lap joints for structural purposes is highly convenient in various fields of
engineering, in particular mechanical and aeronautical. In fact, their use not only reduces
realization time and costs, but also increases corrosion and fatigue resistance as well as
strengthens against fracture. Such joints also have significant dissipation properties.
When compared to mechanically fastened joints, adhesive joints have the advantages
of having less sources of stress concentrations, more uniform distribution of load, and better
fatigue properties.
To determine stresses and strains under a given loading and to predict the probable
points of failure, there are two basic mathematical approaches for the analyses of adhesively
bonded joints: closed-form analysis (analytical methods) and numerical methods (i.e. finiteelement analyses).Analytical models such as the classical work by Goland and Reissner
(1944) usually involve some simplifying assumptions. However, some of those models yield
closed-form solutions. Among the numerical models, the finite element method has been
extensively used. The finite-element method has the great advantage that the stresses in a
body of almost any geometrical shape under load can be determined. Linear and non-linear
finite-element analyses have been carried out by various researchers on different types of
adhesive joints, and the adhesive effective stresses and strains have been evaluated.

2.1 Research on two dimensional model

One of the first finite element analyses of a single-lap joint was published by Woolley and
Carver (1971). They used plane stress elements, performed linear analysis, and modelled the
adhesive layer with two rows of elements, thus obtaining the stress variation across the
adhesive thickness. Similar linear analyses were done by Guess et al (1977). They used a
more refined mesh, which allowed them to identify significant stress gradients across the
adhesive thickness.

11

Harrison and Harrison (1974) did a simplified analysis in which they considered
rigid adherents and studied the adhesive deformations.
Adams and Peppiatt (1974) used plane strain triangular elements to model a singlelap joint and considered the adhesive layer to have either a square edge or a spew fillet.
Cooper and Sawyer (1980) considered geometric nonlinearities in their model. A
similar analysis was performed by Harris and Adams (1982), Tsai and Morton (1994)
incorporated material and geometric nonlinearities in their analysis. They used triangular and
quadrangular plane strain elements and modelled the spew fillet at the end of the adhesive
layer.
Barker and Hatt (1973) published one of the earlier works in this area. They
developed a four-node element for two-dimensional analysis that behaves like a spring with
normal and shear stiffnesses, which are dependent on the thickness of the adhesive layer.
Carpenter and Barsoum (1989) developed two specific elements that incorporate
some assumptions used in several analytical studies. These elements can be used with twodimensional plane stress or plane strain elements, as well as with shell or beam elements.
Lin and Lin (1994) introduced an element that represents both the adhesive layer and
the adherents and that is based on Timoshenkos beam theory.

2.2 Research on three dimensional model

All the finite element analyses referred to above are two-dimensional. However, even for a
simple adhesive joint such as the single-lap joint, stresses are of three dimensional nature.
This was investigated by Tsai and Morton who performed three-dimensional linear elastic
finite element analysis of a single-lap joint in which boundary conditions account for the
geometric nonlinear effects.
Edlund and Klarbring (1992) developed an element for geometric nonlinear
analysis. They assumed that the adhesive layer is of negligible thickness and has linear elastic
behaviour.
Andruet et al. (2000) developed a model for three dimensional analysis of adhesive
joints based on shell and solid elements. The shell elements are used to model the adherents
and the adhesive layer is modelled as a solid element with offset nodes in the mid-planes of
the adherents. The element formulation includes geometric nonlinearities, and thermal and
moisture effects. In addition to considering the three-dimensional nature of adhesive joints,
the calculation of accurate stresses at the adherentadhesive interfaces is of primary concern.
12

Zhou and Keller (2004) presented bridge deck made from fiber reinforced polymer
(FRP) composites and discuss the adhesive joints in connection of FRP bridge deck to steel
main girder to transfer the loads. Compared to the behaviour of a reference steel girder,
deflections of the two girders at the SLS were decreased by 30% and failure loads increased
by 56% due to full composite action in the adhesive layer. The adhesive connections were
able to prevent buckling of the yielding top steel flanges.
Jiang, Kolstein and Bijlaard (2012) focussed on the mechanical behaviour and
failure mode of the adhesively-bonded joins between FRP sandwich decks and steel girders.
The adhesively-bonded joints were experimentally investigated under tensile loading. The
average ultimate failure load of surface pre-treated specimens was 17.62 kN, which was
9.83% higher than that of un-pretreated specimens. Further comparison on failure modes
confirmed that the surface pre-treatment can improve the bonding quality between FRP
composites and adhesive layer, and the failure load of the adhesive joint closely related to the
FRP delamination area. Furthermore, a 3D numerical modelling was conducted using
ABAQUS 6.8.
Haghani, Al-Emrani (2012) focussed on technique of strengthening steel structures
is the design of adhesive joints used to bond FRP laminates to steel substrates. Very limited
research work has been conducted in this area and, at the present time, there is a lack of
suitable design models for FRP-strengthened steel members.
Nimje, Panigrahi (2013) focussed on three dimensional (3D) stress analyses of
functionally graded adhesively bonded tee joint made of laminated Fiber Reinforced
Polymeric (FRP) composite. They carried out geometrically non-linear Finite Element
Analysis (FEA).
Adhesively bonded LSJs(lap shear joints) are widely used in aerospace structures for
joining and stiffening laminated FRP composite panels and the simulation of growth of preexisting delamination damage fronts in the adherents of the LSJ under load is required to be
carried out in advance for safe life prediction and subsequent design modification Parida,
Pradhan 2014).

2.3 Experimental investigation

According to ASTM (vila and Bueno 2004) carried out an experimental investigation on
single-lap bonded joint and wavy-lap joint of laminate composites as shown in Fig. (a) and
(b).

13

(a)

(b)
Fig. 2.1 Schematic form of (a) a single-lap joint; (b) wavy-lap joint

The wavy-lap joint design was first introduced by Zeng and Sun (2001). When the joint
failure was analysed, an adherent failure by delamination was observed for the wavy-lap
samples while for the single-lap joints the light tear failure was observed. Beside the
experimental tests, a finite element simulation was also carried out to analyse the stress fields
inside the joints.
Jiang et al. (2014) presented an experimental study of the adhesively bonded joints of
between FRP sandwich decks and steel girders of FRP-steel composite bridge system
considering the distribution of traffic loads in the longitudinal and transverse directions of
bridges, the adhesive bonded joints have been experimentally studied under six loading
conditions, including tensile loading, shear loading and four combining ratios of tensile and
shear loading. Thus, the adhesive joint is in the shear stress state to transfer the loading from
FRP deck to steel beam, see Fig.

14

Fig. 2.2 Shear stress in the longitudinal direction

Consequently, a three dimensional finite element model was developed using ABAQUS.
They observed that, the edge zone, approximately 10 mm from the ends of adhesive layer,
was the most sensitive area to initiate the failure, where both the shear stress peak and the
tensile stress singularity were located. They observed from the stress distribution through the
interface between the steel support and the adhesive layer, that the failure of adhesive joint
was induced by the combination of both tensile and shear stress.

Fig. 2.3 FRPsteel composite bridge system

2.4 Finite element models

Panigrahi and Pradhan (2007) developed a three dimensional finite element model to
compute the out-of-plane normal and shear stresses in an adhesive bonded single-lap joint in
laminated composite plates, which is also capable of handling initiation of damages and its
15

growth. They observed that the peel stresses are extremely sensitive to the three dimensional
effect, but the shear stresses are not. Further, Aswini et al. (2012) studied the interfacial
stresses and deformation characteristics of adhesively bonded double-lap joint.
Hu et al. (2013) presented a numerical model to characterize the effect of cyclic
temperature environment on adhesively bonded joints using ABAQUS as shown in Fig. 3.3.
An environmental degradation factor was introduced into a cohesive zone model to evaluate
the degradation process in the adhesive layer caused by the cyclic-temperature environment
and the stress states in adhesive layer before and after temperature exposure treatment were
investigated. An experimental investigation was also carried out.

Fig.2.4 Finite element model of a typical single-lap joint

2.5 Analytical models

Ascione (2009) developed a mathematical model for studying the equilibrium problem of
adhesive double and single-lap joints between laminated composite plates. The adherents
have been modeled following the classical hypotheses of the beam technical theory and the
adhesive layers have been modeled by means of two different interfacial cohesive bilinear
laws of opening and sliding. The continuous distribution of independent springs at adhesive
layer were considered, which are capable of contrasting the relative displacements between
the adherents.

16

Yousefsani and Tahani (2013) presented analytical solutions for adhesively bonded
composite single-lap joints using full layer-wise theory, dividing the joint thickness into a
large number of mathematical layers. The effects of adhesive thickness and loading
conditions on the interfacial peel stress, shear stress and Von-Mises stress distributions along
the length and through the thickness of the adhesive layer were studied.

17

CHAPTER 4
SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to investigate the behaviour and reviewing the analysis
procedures for the joints in FRP laminated composite. Various joint types for FRP
composites, their important design parameters and types of failures have been presented. A
brief literature survey for analysis of FRP laminated composite joints have been carried out.
In conjunction with experimental investigations of the composite joints, analytical models
and numerical models are available in literatures. Based on the outcomes of this present
report, the following conclusions can be drawn:

3D FE models for laminated composite had the drawback of being computationally

expensive. Moreover, extensive parametric study may be required during modelling to
get accurate results. However, three dimensional finite element modelling of the
composite joints has become feasible with the aid of modern computers.

Number of literatures on three dimensional analysis of composite adhesive joints are

limited.

When compared to mechanically fastened joints, adhesive joints have the advantages
of having less sources of stress concentrations, more uniform distribution of load, and
better fatigue properties.

Scope

The brittle character of FRP composite materials and adhesive joints need to be better
understood, especially under the colder temperature and freezing condition;

The post curing mechanism is evident for adhesive joints exposed to the hydrothermal
aging environment. So work can be conducted on how to realize the post-curing
process in the in-situ condition of FRP-steel composite bridges;

Environmental effects on the fatigue and creep performance of adhesively bonded

joints need to be investigated in the future.

REFERENCES

18

1) Aswini, K., Pattabhi G., Latha, I. B., Santosh, S., and Rao, M. V. (2012). Analysis of
adhesively bonded double lap joint in laminated FRP composites subjected to
longitudinal loading. International Journal of Engineering Science & Advanced
Technology, 2(2), 307316.
2) Hu, P., Han, X., da Silva, L. F. M., and Li, W. D. (2013). Strength prediction of
adhesively bonded joints under cyclic thermal loading using a cohesive zone model.
International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives, 41, 615.
3) Panigrahi, S. K., and Pradhan, B. (2007). Three dimensional failure analysis and
damage propagation behavior of adhesively bonded single lap joints in laminated FRP
composites. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 26(2), 183201.
4) Yousefsani, S. A., and Tahani, M. (2013). Analytical solutions for adhesively bonded
composite single-lap joints under mechanical loadings using full layer wise theory.
International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives, Elsevier, 43, 3241.
5) Zeng, Q., and Sun, C. T. (2001). Novel design of a bonded lap joint. AIAA Journal,
39(10), 19911996.
6) Jiang, X., Kolstein, M. H., and Bijlaard, F. S. K. (2014). Experimental and numerical
study on mechanical behavior of an adhesively-bonded joint of FRPsteel composite
bridge under shear loading. Composite Structures, Elsevier Ltd, 108, 387399.
7) vila, A. F., and Bueno, P. D. O. (2004). An experimental and numerical study on
adhesive joints for composites. Composite Structures, 64(3-4), 531537.
8) Ascione, F. (2009). Mechanical behaviour of FRP adhesive joints: A theoretical
model. Composites Part B: Engineering, Elsevier Ltd, 40(2), 116124.
9) J.P.M. Gon-calves, M.F.S.F. de Moura*, P.M.S.T. de Castro (2002) , A three-

dimensional finite element model for stress analysis of adhesive joints

19