Advertisement

Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 304–314 | Cite as

Fracture Analysis of a Special Cracked Lap Shear (CLS) Specimen with Utilization of Virtual Crack Closure Technique (VCCT) by Finite Element Methods

  • Majid Azimi
  • Seyed Sajad Mirjavadi
  • Seyed Ali Asli
  • A. M. S. Hamouda
Technical Article---Peer-Reviewed

Abstract

Some of the most important characteristics due to a fracture investigation of a special specimen are taken into account. Debonding considerations for a composite/steel cracked lap shear (CLS) specimen by utilization of finite element methods (FEM) as well as a virtual crack closure technique (VCCT) approach have been investigated. Strain energy release rate, delamination load case and direct cycle fatigue analysis have taken into consideration in this study, and the corresponding simulations have been done by ABAQUS/Standard. Linear elastic fracture criteria are used for validation of numerical results from the simulation. For comparison of three different categories of analysis, some special characteristics such as effective energy release rate ratio, bond state, time at bond failure and opening behind crack tip at bond failure have been illustrated. In this work, a detailed analysis of a special CLS specimen debonding by using VCCT and FEM is presented and varied results for validation of this kind of combination are obtained and have been discussed.

Keywords

CLS VCCT Debonding Strain energy release rate Fatigue 

References

  1. 1.
    R. Krueger, Virtual crack closure technique: history, approach, and applications. Appl. Mech. Rev. 57(2), 109–143 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    X. Li, P. Liu, Delamination analysis of carbon fiber composites under dynamic loads using acoustic emission. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 16(1), 142–153 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Yayla, Fracture Surface morphology of delamination failure of polymer fiber composites under different failure modes. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 16(2), 264–270 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Liu et al., A study on the intralaminar damage and interlaminar delamination of carbon fiber composite laminates under three-point bending using acoustic emission. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 15(1), 101–121 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Gupta et al., Investigation of cracks generated during flow forming of Nb–Hf–Ti alloy sheet. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 7(6), 424–428 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Rahsepar et al., Failure analysis of disbondment of three-layer polyethylene coatings from the surface of buried steel pipelines. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 15(5), 604–611 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Xie, S.B. Biggers, Strain energy release rate calculation for a moving delamination front of arbitrary shape based on the virtual crack closure technique. Part I: formulation and validation. Eng. Fract. Mech. 73(6), 771–785 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Hoyt, P.J. Minguet, S.H. Ward, Strength and fatigue life modeling of bonded joints in composite structure. J. Compos. Technol. Res. 24(3), 188–208 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Krueger, D. Goetze, J. Ransom, in Influence of Finite Element Software on Energy Release Rates Computed Using the Virtual Crack Closure Technique (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P.S. Valvo, in Towards a Revised Virtual Crack Closure Technique Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E.F. Rybicki, M. Kanninen, A finite element calculation of stress intensity factors by a modified crack closure integral. Eng. Fract. Mech. 9(4), 931–938 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    K. Shivakumar, P. Tan, J. Newman, A virtual crack-closure technique for calculating stress intensity factors for cracked three dimensional bodies. Int. J. Fract. 36(3), R43–R50 (1988)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. Xie et al., Computation of energy release rates for kinking cracks based on virtual crack closure technique. Comput. Model. Eng. Sci. 6(6), 515–524 (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    C. Sun, W. Qian, The use of finite extension strain energy release rates in fracture of interfacial cracks. Int. J. Solids Struct. 34(20), 2595–2609 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    J.D. Whitcomb, Analysis of a laminate with a postbuckled embedded delamination, including contact effects. J. Compos. Mater. 26(10), 1523–1535 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Fawaz, Application of the virtual crack closure technique to calculate stress intensity factors for through cracks with an elliptical crack front. Eng. Fract. Mech. 59(3), 327–342 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    I. Raju, R. Sistla, T. Krishnamurthy, Fracture mechanics analyses for skin-stiffener debonding. Eng. Fract. Mech. 54(3), 371–385 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    R. Krueger et al., Comparison of 2D finite element modeling assumptions with results from 3D analysis for composite skin-stiffener debonding. Compos. Struct. 57(1), 161–168 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. Szekrényes, J. Uj, Comparison of some improved solutions for mixed-mode composite delamination coupons. Compos. Struct. 72(3), 321–329 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Meo, E. Thieulot, Delamination modelling in a double cantilever beam. Compos. Struct. 71(3), 429–434 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. Krueger, P.J. Minguet, Analysis of composite skin–stiffener debond specimens using a shell/3D modeling technique. Compos. Struct. 81(1), 41–59 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    M. Khoshravan, A. Yourdkhani, Numerical modeling of delamination in GFRP composites. Eng. Trans. 55(1), 61–77 (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    F. Dharmawan, in The Structural Integrity and Damage Tolerance of Composite t-Joints in Naval Vessels (RMIT University, 2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Y. Zhu, in Characterization of Interlaminar Fracture Toughness of a Carbon/Epoxy Composite Material (The Pennsylvania State University, 2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    L. Tong, Q. Luo, in Analysis of Cracked Lap Shear (CLS) Joints. Modeling of Adhesively Bonded Joints (Springer, Berlin, 2008), pp. 25–51Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    C.-G. Gustafson, M. Hojo, D. Holm, A nonlinear analysis of the CLS specimen. J. Compos. Mater. 23(2), 146–162 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    T. Brussat, S. Chiu, S. Mostovoy, in Fracture Mechanics for Structural Adhesive Bonds. DTIC Document (1977)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    C. Lin, K. Liechti, Similarity concepts in the fatigue fracture of adhesively bonded joints. J. Adhes. 21(1), 1–24 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    D. Schmueser, N. Johnson, Effect of bondline thickness on mixed-mode debonding of adhesive joints to electroprimed steel surfaces. J. Adhes. 32(2–3), 171–191 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    P. Cheuk, L. Tong, Failure of adhesive bonded composite lap shear joints with embedded precrack. Compos. Sci. Technol. 62(7), 1079–1095 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    K.Y. Rhee, Characterization of delamination behavior of unidirectional graphite/PEEK laminates using cracked lap shear (CLS) specimens. Compos. Struct. 29(4), 379–382 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    K.Y. Rhee, C.H. Chi, Determination of fracture toughness, GC of Graphite/epoxy composites from a cracked lap shear (CLS) specimen. J. Compos. Mater. 35(1), 77–93 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    G. Fernlund, J. Spelt, Failure load prediction of structural adhesive joints: part 1: analytical method. Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 11(4), 213–220 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    G. Fernlund, J. Spelt, Mixed-mode fracture characterization of adhesive joints. Compos. Sci. Technol. 50(4), 441–449 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Y.-H. Lai, M.D. Rakestraw, D.A. Dillard, The cracked lap shear specimen revisited—a closed form solution. Int. J. Solids Struct. 33(12), 1725–1743 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    L. Hart-Smith, in Adhesive-Bonded Scarf and Stepped-Lap Joints (1973)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    S.A. Brown, L. Tong, A localised experimental–numerical technique for determining mixed mode strain energy release rates. Compos. Struct. 94(1), 132–142 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    C.T. Herakovich, in Mechanics of Fibrous Composites (1998)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    S.N. Kuppannagari, in Structural Analysis and Design of Lightweight Composite Mortar Barrel (2016)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    M. Azimi, S.S. Mirjavadi, S.A. Asli, Investigation of mesh sensitivity influence to determine crack characteristic by finite element methods. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 16(3), 506–512 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    M.J. Donough, in Load Ratio Effects in the Fatigue Crack Propagation of Composite Laminates and Bonded Joints (RMIT University, 2014)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    M. Zamanzadeh, E. Larkin, R. Mirshams, Fatigue failure analysis case studies. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 15(6), 803–809 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    D. Systèmes, in Abaqus 6.13 Online Documentation (2013). http://129.97.46.200:2080/v6.13/books/usb/default.htm

Copyright information

© ASM International 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical Engineering, College of EngineeringSharif University of TechnologyTehranIran
  2. 2.School of Mechanical Engineering, College of EngineeringUniversity of TehranTehranIran
  3. 3.School of Mechanical Engineering, College of EngineeringIran University of Science and TechnologyTehranIran
  4. 4.Department of Mechanical and Industrial EngineeringQatar UniversityDohaQatar

Personalised recommendations