quasi-static strength and fatigue life of hybrid (bonded/bolted) composite single-lap joints
TRANSCRIPT
Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129
www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct
Quasi-static strength and fatigue life of hybrid(bonded/bolted) composite single-lap joints
Gordon Kelly
Division of Lightweight Structures, Department of Aeronautical and Vehicle Engineering, Kungl Tekniska Hogskolan, S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
Available online 2 March 2005
Abstract
The strength and fatigue life of hybrid (bonded/bolted) joints with carbon-fibre reinforced plastic adherends have been investi-
gated. The effect of adhesive material properties and laminate stacking sequence on the joint structural behaviour and failure modes
were determined experimentally. Hybrid joints were shown to have greater strength, stiffness and fatigue life in comparison to adhe-
sive bonded joints. However, the benefits were only observed in joints with lower modulus adhesives which allowed for load sharing
between the adhesive and the bolt. Hybrid joints with high modulus adhesives showed no significant improvement in strength
although increased fatigue life was observed due to the presence of the bolt.
Three distinct stages in the fatigue life of hybrid joints were observed where the adhesive, the bolt and their combination were all
contributing to the load transfer. Fatigue crack initiation was found to occur later in the hybrid joints where the bolt transferred a
significant portion of the load.
The failure mode of the joints was shown to be dependent upon the relation between the hybrid joint strength and the bearing
strength of the laminate. Hybrid joints in which the strength greatly exceeded the laminate bearing strength failed catastrophically in
net-section mode. In contrast, laminates with higher bearing strength failed in a non-catastrophic bearing mode.
Careful comparison of the material bearing strength and adhesive bond strength is necessary to ensure increased joint strength
and non-catastrophic failure.
� 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Keywords: Composite; Single-lap joint; Hybrid (bonded/bolted); Finite element analysis; Strength; Fatigue life
1. Introduction
Joining of composite laminates is commonly achieved
by adhesive bonding, mechanical fastening or a combi-
nation of the two methods. The combination of adhesivebonding and mechanical fastening is often employed as
a safeguard against defects within the adhesive layer
which may lead to premature or catastrophic failure.
Prediction of the joint fatigue life and the susceptibility
of the adhesive/interface to environmental attack are
additional uncertainties which have resulted in hybrid
joint designs being used in practice.
0263-8223/$ - see front matter � 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2004.11.002
E-mail address: [email protected]
Hybrid joining is attractive in automotive applica-
tions as the technique can offer benefits during part
manufacture. The bolts can be used as a means to align
and attach different structural parts to one another and
provide fixation during adhesive cure. In addition, hy-brid joints can offer improved performance in compari-
son to adhesive bonded joints during crash loading
where part separation is often undesirable.
Previous studies which have focused on aerospace
applications [1–3] have not regarded hybrid joints to of-
fer any significant increase in strength over adhesive
bonded joints, mainly due to the low fraction of load
transferred by the bolt. The results were based on theo-retical analysis with aerospace joint configurations and
material systems being adopted. However, it was
tt
φ=6.35mm
L=25mm
a
φ =10mm
CFRP AdherendAdhesive
Huck C6L Lockbolt
120 G. Kelly / Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129
acknowledged that bolts can be valuable in heavily
loaded structures through arresting any initial damage.
Montabone et al. [4] investigated a combination of bolt-
ing and cold bonding to join composite sandwich panels
in a butt-strap configuration. Simplified finite element
analysis was used to estimate failure loads with hybridjoints being predicted to be 25% stronger in comparison
to adhesive bonded joints. However, the joint failure
load was limited by peeling of the CFRP and the adhe-
sive material did not exceed the yield stress prior to
failure.
Limited published work exists where the structural
behaviour of hybrid joints is characterised experimen-
tally. Fu and Mallick [5] investigated the static and fati-gue strength of single-lap joints made from structural
injection moulded (SRIM) composite material. Hybrid
joints were designed with large washers which covered
the main part of the overlap region. Higher static
strength and longer fatigue life was observed in compa-
rison to adhesive bonded joints. However, the perfor-
mance of hybrid joints was sensitive to the washer
configuration with larger washer areas yielding greaterstrength and fatigue life. Imanaka et al. [6] investigated
the combination of blind rivets and adhesive bonding in
lap-joints made from high strength steel. The effect of
joint width and the adhesive properties on the fatigue
life were investigated. The fatigue life of bonded and riv-
eted/bonded joints with an acrylic adhesive were found
to be approximately equal but increased fatigue life
was observed in the hybrid joints with an epoxy adhe-sive. The fatigue strength of the joints increased with
reduction in joint width to hole diameter ratio (w/d).
The propagation rate of fatigue cracks was reduced in
riveted/bonded joints in comparison with adhesive
bonded joints.
It was recently shown by Kelly [7] that hybrid com-
posite single-lap joints can be designed where the bolt
transfers a significant part of the load. The joint geom-etry and adhesive mechanical properties were found to
be significant parameters governing the load transfer
distribution in the joint. As a continuation of the previ-
ous study, the present paper addresses the static
strength, failure mechanisms and fatigue resistance of
the joints. The performance of the joints is compared
to that of adhesive bonded joints. An important aim
of the present study was to determine if the presenceof the bolt affected the initiation of fatigue damage in
the joints. The number of cycles to damage initiation
was measured for different joint configurations using
the backface strain technique [8].
w= 25mmL =160mmtot
Fig. 1. Test specimen geometry for bonded and hybrid composite
joints.
2. Experimental
An experimental investigation was undertaken to
measure the quasi-static strength and fatigue life of
bonded and hybrid (bonded/bolted) single-lap joints.
Measurements of joint compliance and relative displace-
ment between the adherends were performed to aid in
understanding the load transfer in the joint. The joint
failure modes were characterised together with the initi-
ation of fatigue damage, providing valuable knowledgerequired for hybrid joint design.
2.1. Materials and specimen manufacture
Specimens were machined from carbon fibre epoxy
laminates manufactured by resin transfer moulding
(RTM). A continuous carbon fibre (Toray T700) non-
crimp fabric from heavy tow yarn was used togetherwith epoxy resin (Shell Epicote LV 828). Two different
laminate thicknesses were used in the study with the
stacking sequences [0/45/90/�45]s (t = 1.6 mm) and [0/
45/90/�45]s2 (t = 3.2 mm), respectively. Laminate plates
of size 300 mm · 140 mm were bonded together in a sin-
gle-lap joint configuration. The adherend surfaces were
abraded using 400 grit sand paper and rinsed with ace-
tone prior to bonding. Spacer plates of thickness 0.5mm were used to control the thickness of the adhesive
and fillets were manufactured at the ends of the overlap.
Test specimens were machined from the plates to the
geometry illustrated in Fig. 1 using a diamond tip saw.
Two different adhesives were considered in the pres-
ent study. The first adhesive was a two component struc-
tural polyurethane adhesive (Pliogrip 7400/7410,
Ashland Specialty Chemicals). The adhesive had a lowelastic modulus and a large strain to failure. The adhe-
sive was cured for 30 min at a temperature of 100 �C.The second adhesive was a two component epoxy sys-
tem (Epibond 1590 A/B, Vantico). The adhesive had a
higher elastic modulus and lower failure strain than
the polyurethane adhesive. The curing condition for
the Epibond adhesive was 25 min at room tempera-
ture followed by 1 h at 80 �C. The tensile stress–strain
Strain Gauge
CFRP
Brackets to attach Extensiometer
1mm
CFRP
Adhesive
Huck bolt
Fig. 3. Experimental setup.
G. Kelly / Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129 121
behaviour of the adhesives was measured according to
ASTM D638-02a [9] and the results are shown in Fig. 2.
The manufacture of the hybrid joints was performed
in two steps. First, a bonded joint was manufactured
and cured as described. Thereafter, holes of diameter
6.35 mm were drilled in the centre of the overlap regionin the bonded joints using a dagger drill. A plate was
used at the rear side of the joint to limit any delamina-
tion caused by the drilling process. Stainless steel Huck
C6L lock-bolts were then inserted into the holes and
installation was performed using a pneumatic fastening
system which was used for automated installation of
the bolts. The bolts were located at the centre of the
overlap which gave edge distance to bolt diameter (e/d)and width to bolt diameter (w/d) ratios of 2 and 4,
respectively. The values were chosen to obtain bearing
failure mode, based on the results from bearing strength
tests on the same material [10].
A series of bonded, bolted and hybrid joint configu-
rations were manufactured to allow for comparison
between the different joining techniques. The configura-
tions considered in the present study are listed in Table1. The joint width and overlap length were both 25 mm.
0 10 20 30 40 50 600
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Strain (%)
Str
ess
(MP
a)
Epibond 1590 A/BPliogrip 7400/7410
Fig. 2. Tensile stress–strain behaviour of the Pliogrip and Epibond
adhesive systems.
Table 1
Test specimen configurations
Joint Adhesive Adherend thickness
(mm)
Adhesive thickness
(mm)
Bonded Pliogrip 1.6 0.5
Bonded Pliogrip 3.2 0.5
Bonded Epibond 3.2 0.5
Bolted – 1.6 –
Bolted – 3.2 –
Hybrid Pliogrip 1.6 0.5
Hybrid Pliogrip 3.2 0.5
Hybrid Epibond 3.2 0.5
2.2. Testing procedure
The quasi-static tests were conducted using a univer-
sal testing machine (Instron 4505) with a 100 kN load
cell. The system was fully computer controlled and al-
lowed for acquisition of load, displacement and strain
data. The tests were run in displacement control at a rate
of 1 mm/min. The experimental setup is illustrated in
Fig. 3.
Fatigue testing was performed using a Schenk PSA-10 servo hydraulic universal testing machine with a 10
kN load cell. The load and grip displacement were re-
corded throughout the tests using a PC data acquisition
system. The tests were conducted in load control mode
with a sinusoidal waveform at a frequency of 5 Hz.
The joints were subjected to tension–tension fatigue with
a stress ratio (R = rmin/rmax) equal to 0.1. Several spe-
cimens were instrumented with strain gauges (ShowaN11-FA-2-120-11, gauge length = 2 mm) in order to de-
tect damage initiation using the backface strain tech-
nique [8]. This technique relies on the fact that
damage, such as fracture of the adhesive layer, results
in a change in the strain distribution on the surface of
the adherends. The strain gauges were positioned at
both ends of the overlap as shown in Fig. 3 with the
gauge locations being based on the recommendationsby Crocombe et al. [11].
3. Finite element analysis
Finite element analysis was used to study the behav-
iour of the joints and predict the load transfer and stress
distribution in the joints at different load levels. A three-dimensional model of a hybrid single-lap joint was
developed using the ABAQUS finite element code
[12] with the model including the effects of large-
deformations, bolt-hole contact and non-linear adhesive
material properties. The model was verified experimen-
tally and shown to be able to predict load transfer in
hybrid single-lap joints [7].
The laminate adherends were modelled using linearbrick elements with quadratic elements being used for
Fig. 4. Finite element model of the hybrid single-lap joint.
Table 2
Elastic properties for the carbon fibre/epoxy lamina from [15]
E11 (GPa) E22 (GPa) E33 (GPa) G12 (GPa) G13 (GPa) G23 (GPa) m12 m13 m23
98 7.8 7.8 4.7 4.7 3.2 0.34 0.34 0.44
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Normalised Overlap length
Max
imum
Prin
cipa
l Str
ess
(MP
a)
Epibond t=3.2mmPliogrip t=3.2mmPliogrip t=1.6mm
Fig. 5. Stress distribution in the adhesive for the hybrid single-lap
joints (P = 4 kN).
122 G. Kelly / Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129
the bolt. A neat fit was assumed between the bolt and
the laminate and this condition was found to provide
a higher bound value for the load transferred by the bolt
[7]. Contact between the bolt and the adherends was
modelled based on the contact pair approach in ABA-
QUS with finite sliding allowed between surfaces in con-
tact. A friction coefficient of 0.2 was assumed between
laminates and the bolt. The bolt shear load was pre-dicted through summation of the nodal forces on the
mid-plane of the bolt. Symmetry was adopted along
the length of the joint and thus the model was reduced
to a half model as shown in Fig. 4.
The CFRP adherends were modelled using linear
elastic material properties detailed in Table 2. The true
stress–strain properties of the adhesive were modelled
as shown in Fig. 2. The bolt was modelled as a linearelastic isotropic material and assigned steel material
properties (E = 205 GPa, m = 0.3).
The analyses were performed in two steps. An initial
bolt clamping load of 5 kN, which was set by the pneu-
matic installation system, was applied as a pre-tension
load to the mid-surface of the bolt. Thereafter, a tensile
load was applied to one end of the joint which was free
to move in the longitudinal (x) direction only with theopposite end of the joint having clamped boundary con-
ditions (ux,uy,uz = 0).
3.1. Stress analysis and load transfer predictions
The maximum principal stress along the centreline of
the adhesive bond is plotted in Fig. 5. The stresses are
plotted from toe-to-toe and at the mid-width of thejoint. The stress distributions in the adhesive layer of
the different joints are similar in the central region where
a compressive stress state exists. At the ends of the over-
lap, stress concentrations exist and the stress state in the
adhesive is tensile. The stress concentrations are most
evident in the joint with the higher modulus epoxy adhe-
sive. Peaks are evident in the region directly adjacent to
the embedded adherend corner and at the toe of the fil-
let. The peak stress in the epoxy joints is approximately
75% greater than the peak stress in the polyurethane
joints with the same adherend thickness. A single stress
peak is evident in the polyurethane joints with the peakstress occurring in the region adjacent to the embedded
adhesive corner. The stress is lower in the fillet region.
The load transfer distribution in the hybrid single-lap
joints is illustrated in Fig. 6. The load transfer is charac-
terised by the ratio of the load transferred by the bolt to
the total applied load. The load transfer distribution is
shown to differ in the joints with the adhesive elastic
modulus having a significant effect. The load transferredby the bolt in the hybrid joint with the epoxy adhesive is
0 2 4 6 8 10 120
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Applied load (kN)
Bol
t loa
d /to
tal l
oad
(%)
Pliogrip, t=1.6mmPliogrip, t=3.2mmEpibond, t=3.2mm
Fig. 6. Predicted load transfer in the hybrid single-lap joints.
G. Kelly / Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129 123
low with the adhesive transferring approximately 98% of
the applied load. The bolt load transfer is low as a result
of the small relative displacement which occurs betweenthe adherends in the joint. In contrast, the load trans-
ferred by the bolt in the joints with is significantly
higher. Initially, the bolt load increases linearly with
the applied load. At higher load levels, the rate at which
the bolt load increases with the applied load decreases.
0 1 2 3 4 5 60
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Load
(kN
)
Grip Displacement (mm)
BondedBoltedHybrid
0 1 2 30
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Load
(kN
)
Grip Displacem
Fracture of first fillet
Fracture of sec
(a) (b
(c)
Fig. 7. Load displacement behaviour of the bonded, bolted and hybrid sing
adhesive, t = 3.2 mm. (c) Epoxy adhesive, t = 3.2 mm.
The load transferred by the bolt is slightly higher in
the joint with the thicker adherends with the load trans-
fer being related to the relative displacement between the
adherends.
4. Results
4.1. Quasi-static tests
The load displacement behaviour of each of the joint
configurations is illustrated in Fig. 7(a)–(c). The behav-
iour of the bolted, bonded and hybrid joints are com-
pared for the different laminate stacking sequences(and thickness) and adhesive systems.
The load displacement curves of the joints based on
the [0/45/90/�45]s laminates and polyurethane adhesive
are illustrated in Fig. 7(a). It is evident that the bolted
joint configuration has a significantly lower load capac-
ity than the bonded and hybrid joints. The low load
capacity occurs as result of the small area over which
the bolt bearing load is transferred. The thin and rela-tively flexible composite laminates also allow for the bolt
to tilt which increases the stress concentration at the
edge of the hole further reducing the bearing strength.
Adhesive bonding was both a stiffer and stronger joining
0 1 2 3 4 5 60
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Load
(kN
)
Grip Displacement (mm)
BondedBoltedHybrid
4 5 6ent (mm)
BondedBoltedHybrid
ond fillet
)
le-lap joints. (a) Polyurethane adhesive, t = 1.6 mm. (b) Polyurethane
124 G. Kelly / Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129
method for this laminate configuration. Linear elastic
behaviour was observed in the adhesive joint up to
40% of the failure load and the joint strength was
approximately 60% greater than that of the bolted joint.
The hybrid joint was shown to possess the highest stiff-
ness and strength in comparison to the bolted andbonded joints. The joint stiffness was equal to that of
the bonded joint at lower load levels which suggested
that the adhesive was the main load bearing component.
However at load levels greater than 50% of the ultimate
failure load, the hybrid joint was shown to be signifi-
cantly stiffer in comparison to the bonded joint. The in-
crease in stiffness was attributed to the load sharing
between the bolt and the adhesive with the bolt restrict-ing the relative displacement between the adherends.
The ultimate strength of the hybrid joint was 11% higher
than that of the bonded joint.
Somewhat different behaviour was observed in the
joints with the [0/45/90/�45]s2 adherend stacking se-
quence and the polyurethane adhesive (see Fig. 7(b)).
The bolted joint demonstrated almost equal load capa-
city to the bonded joint. However, the stiffness of thebolted joint was lower than that of both the bonded
and hybrid joints. The bonded and hybrid joints demon-
strated similar trends to those observed in the [0/45/90/
�45]s laminates. The stiffness of the joints were equal
in the early stages of loading with the hybrid joint being
stiffer at higher load levels. The difference in stiffness was
related to the relative displacement between the adher-
ends. A typical plot of applied load versus relative dis-placement for the bonded and hybrid joints with the
polyurethane adhesive is shown in Fig. 8. The relative
displacement between the adherends, Ur, was equal for
both joints below an applied load of 5 kN. Thereafter
the effect of the bolt in the hybrid joint was evident, lim-
iting the relative displacement between the adherends
and consequently increasing the joint stiffness. The bolt
0 0.4 0.8 1.20
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Load
(kN
)
Relative displacement between adherends, Ur (mm)
Hybrid JointBonded Join
Fig. 8. Relative displacement measured between the adherends in bonded
7400/7410 adhesive.
load predicted from the finite element analysis was 23%
of the total load at the point where the relative displace-
ment curves for the bonded and hybrid joint diverged.
The ultimate strength of the hybrid joint was 22%
higher than that of the bonded joint. Thus, the benefits
of the hybrid joint in terms of stiffness and strength weregreater for the [0/45/90/�45]s2 laminate in comparison to
the [0/45/90/�45]s laminate.
A comparison of the joints with the [0/45/90/�45]s2stacking sequence and epoxy adhesive is illustrated in
Fig. 7(c). The ultimate strengths of the bolted and
bonded joints were found to be similar. The hybrid joint
illustrated similar behaviour to the adhesive bonded
joint even after fracture of the fillet at one end of theoverlap. The main deviation in the behaviour occurred
at fracture of the second fillet when a sudden shift in
load transfer to the bolt occurred. After fracture of the
adhesive layer, the entire load was transferred by the
bolt and the load bearing capacity of the joint increased
to the laminate bearing strength. No significant increase
in strength was observed in the hybrid joints with both
the bolt and the adhesive working independently. Therelative displacement between the adherends in the
bonded and hybrid joints was small with negligible dif-
ference being observed between both joint configura-
tions. This supported the low bolt load transfer
predictions from the finite element analysis as shown
in Fig. 6.
A summary of the ultimate strengths for each of the
joint configurations is listed in Table 3. A minimum ofthree specimens were tested for each joint configuration.
The failure modes were consistent for each of the tested
joint configurations.
4.1.1. Failure modes in bonded joints
The joint failure modes are important with regard to
design, repair and eventual damage tolerance. Failure of
1.6
t
Ur
and hybrid joints with [0/45/90/�45]s2 stacking sequence and Pliogrip
Table 3
Quasi-static joint strengths
Joint type Adhesive Adherend thickness
(mm)
Ultimate strength
(kN)
Bonded Pliogrip 1.6 11.62 ± 0.79
Bonded Pliogrip 3.2 12.48 ± 0.54
Bonded Epibond 3.2 11.83 ± 0.83
Bolted – 1.6 7.56 ± 0.41
Bolted – 3.2 11.66 ± 0.78
Hybrid Pliogrip 1.6 13.19 ± 0.61
Hybrid Pliogrip 3.2 15.62 ± 0.46
Hybrid Epibond 3.2 12.66 ± 0.52
G. Kelly / Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129 125
the bonded joints was catastrophic with separation of
the adherends. The joints with the polyurethane adhe-
sive failed with damage initiating at the embedded adhe-
sive corner and a crack propagating through the
adhesive layer toward the opposite adherend (see Fig.
9(a)). Examination of the failure surface revealed that
the crack had propagated into the composite adherendand through the fibre bundle of the surface ply. The ini-
tial crack at the adherend corner was visible at appro-
ximately 60–70% of the ultimate failure load. Thus,
there was a defined period of damage propagation even
during the quasi-static test.
Failure of the joints bonded with the epoxy adhesive
occurred with the fracture initiating toward the toe of
the adhesive fillet as illustrated in Fig. 9(b). This wassupported by the results from the finite element analysis
which predicted high stresses in this region.
A period of unstable crack growth in the top ply of
the composite was observed prior to catastrophic frac-
ture of the joint. Examination of the failure surfaces re-
vealed fracture through the fibre bundles in the surface
ply, as observed in the joints bonded with the polyure-
thane adhesive. The intralaminar failure mode suggestedthat good adhesion was achieved between both adhe-
sives and the composite adherends.
4.1.2. Failure modes in hybrid joints
Failure initiation in the hybrid joints occurred in a
similar manner to that in the bonded joints. The hybrid
joints failed in two stages with the first stage involving
failure of the adhesive and the second stage involvingfailure of the bolted joint. Failure of the hybrid joints
with the polyurethane adhesive initiated at the embed-
ded adhesive corner as illustrated in Fig. 9(a). Cracks
propagated from both ends of the overlap toward the
centre region of the joint.
(a) Polyurethane adhesive
Fig. 9. Failed modes in the bonded and hybrid jo
4.1.3. [0/45/90/�45]s laminate and polyurethane adhesive
The hybrid joints in the [0/45/90/�45]s laminate failed
by net-section failure. The load level in the hybrid joint
after adhesive failure greatly exceeded the bolted joint
bearing strength and thus the joint failed catastrophi-
cally. Together with the high bolt load and possible dy-namic effects, the undamaged adhesive in the net-section
may contribute to a reduction in the notched tensile
stress. This failure mode has important implications
with regard to the allowable service load and redun-
dancy. The increased static joint strength of a hybrid
joint for this laminate configuration should not be used
to motivate an increase in the service load, but rather be
viewed as an increased factor of safety. The catastrophicfailure was not observed in the bolted joint which failed
in bearing failure mode. While increasing the bolt pitch
distance may reduce the risk for net-section failure, it re-
duces the benefits of using the hybrid joint concept
through reduction of the load transferred by the bolt
as shown in [7].
4.1.4. [0/45/90/�45]s2 laminate and polyurethane
adhesive
The hybrid joints with the [0/45/90/�45]s2 laminate
stacking sequence and polyurethane adhesive failed in
a non-catastrophic manner. Crack initiation in the adhe-
sive was visible at 60% of the ultimate load and a stable
crack growth allowed for the load to be transferred
gradually to the bolt. Final fracture of the adhesive layer
resulted in a sudden load drop of approximately 5 kN.Thereafter, the joint continued to carry load and be-
haved as a bolted joint with the ultimate failure occur-
ring due to bearing failure at the bolt hole. Typical
micro-mechanical damage mechanisms in the hybrid
joints are illustrated in the micrographs shown in Fig.
10. The initial crack propagation was evident in the
adhesive with the cracks propagating through the resin
rich surface layer of the composite laminate. The prop-agation of damage into the composite laminate was con-
sistent with the observations of the fracture surfaces of
the bonded joints. The ultimate failure of the joint was
bearing failure at the bolt hole. The failure was attrib-
uted to compression failure in the 0� oriented ply which
was aligned in the loading direction and thus contrib-
uted significantly to the load bearing capacity of the
laminate. Micro-buckling followed by compressive fail-ure of plies oriented in the load direction was previously
shown to be a failure mechanism responsible for loss of
(b) Epoxy adhesive
ints. Dashed lines illustrate the crack path.
Fig. 10. Micrograph illustrating damage in a hybrid joint at ultimate failure load (Pliogrip adhesive).
126 G. Kelly / Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129
load bearing capacity in the same carbon fibre non-
crimp fabric based laminates [10].
4.1.5. [0/45/90/ �45]s2 laminate and epoxy adhesive
Failure of the hybrid joints with the epoxy adhesive
occurred in stages. Initial failure occurred in the fillet
at one end of the overlap. The joint continued to carryload with no significant loss of stiffness until fracture oc-
curred in the second adhesive fillet. The second fracture
resulted in a significant load drop and with the entire
load being transferred by the bolt. Thereafter, the joint
behaviour resembled that of the bolted joint with ulti-
mate failure occurring due to bearing failure at the bolt
hole.
4.2. Fatigue tests
The results from the fatigue tests are presented in the
form of load-lifetime diagrams in Fig. 11(a)–(c). The
graphs illustrate failure of the adhesive and ultimate fail-
ure of the hybrid joints, and ultimate failure of the adhe-
sive bonded joints. In general, the hybrid joints
demonstrated higher resistance to fatigue than thebonded joints. Extended fatigue life was observed at
all of the tested load levels with the improvement being
more pronounced in the joints with thicker adherends.
At 50% of the static failure load, the improvement in
the fatigue life is in excess of a factor 10 in comparison
to the bonded joints. At lower loads (630�40% Pstatic),
several specimens did not fail and were considered run-
out specimens. The run-out specimens are indicated by
the arrows in the graphs. Static tensile tests were con-
ducted on the run-out specimens to determine the resid-
ual joint strengths. The residual strength of the run-outspecimens are presented in Table 4. The residual
strength of the joints in the [0/45/90/�45]s laminate
was similar to the bolted joint strength. The behaviour
was reasonable, given that the ultimate strength of
bolted joints in composite laminates has been shown
to be relatively insensitive to initial bolt-hole clearance
[10,13,14]. In contrast, the residual strength of the joints
in the [0/45/90/ �45]s2 laminate exceeded the strength ofboth the bonded and bolted joints. This result was not
anticipated and there was no apparent reason for the in-
creased strength. A possible explanation could be the
relaxation of residual stresses within the laminate,
although there was no evidence to support this
hypothesis.
The failure modes and fatigue behaviour were found
to differ depending on the joint configuration. In gen-eral, the bonded joints failed in a similar manner to
the quasi-static tests. The main differences in the fatigue
behaviour of the bonded joints was attributed to the
adhesive system. The bonded joints with the polyure-
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Max
imum
Loa
d (k
N)
Number of Cycles, N
Bonded Joint FailureHybrid Bond FailureHybrid Joint Failure
(a)
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Max
imum
Loa
d (k
N)
Number of Cycles, N
Bonded Joint FailureHybrid Bond FailureHybrid Joint Failure
(b)
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Max
imum
Loa
d (k
N)
Number of Cycles, N
Bonded Joint FailureHybrid Bond FailureHybrid Joint Failure
(c)
Fig. 11. Load lifetime diagrams for bonded and hybrid single-lap joints. (Arrows indicate specimen run-out.) (a) Polyurethane adhesive, t = 1.6 mm.
(b) Polyurethane adhesive, t = 3.2 mm. (c) Epoxy adhesive, t = 3.2 mm.
G. Kelly / Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129 127
thane adhesive had a period of visible, stable crackgrowth which was observed as an increase in the speci-
men compliance. In contrast, the bonded joints with
the epoxy adhesive illustrated no change in compliance
prior to catastrophic failure. Only specimens loaded at
low load levels (30% Pstatic) had a period of sustained
crack growth prior to failure.
Three distinct stages were observed in the fatigue life
of the hybrid joints as shown in Fig. 12. The initial stageconsisted of fatigue of the adhesive. After damage initi-
ation in the adhesive, a second stage was observed where
Table 4
Residual strength of hybrid joints after fatigue run-out
Adhesive Adherend
thickness (mm)
Maximum fatigue
load (kN)
Residual
strength (kN)
Pliogrip 1.6 2.5 7.8
Pliogrip 1.6 3.5 7.3
Pliogrip 1.6 4.0 8.4
Pliogrip 3.2 4.5 13.9
Pliogrip 3.2 5.0 14.3
Pliogrip 3.2 6.0 13.4
Epibond 3.2 5.0 13.2
Epibond 3.2 6.0 15.2
Epibond 3.2 7.0 14.0
Epibond 3.2 7.0 13.6
damage propagated in the adhesive layer and the jointcompliance increased and thereby transferred load onto
the bolt. Finally, the third stage was characterised by fa-
tigue loading of a bolted joint with the adhesive layer
having failed. The relative length of the stages was
dependent upon the applied load and adhesive charac-
teristics. As the load level increased, the first and second
stages of fatigue of the hybrid joints shortened with the
main part of the fatigue life being governed by thebolted joint. However, at lower loads the first stage
involving fatigue of the adhesive was a significant part
of the joint fatigue life. Due to the brittle behaviour of
the epoxy adhesive, the second stage (or transition stage)
was extremely short with the cracks propagating
through the adhesive at a high rate.
Comparison of the bonded and hybrid joints revealed
a significant difference in the behaviour of the joints withthe epoxy and polyurethane adhesives. Plots of ampli-
tude versus number of cycles revealed that failure of
the adhesive in the hybrid joints with the epoxy adhesive
occurred after a similar number of cycles as in the
bonded joints. Thus, the behaviour of the two load
transfer methods (adhesive and bolt) work essentially
independently of one another and in series. In con-
trast, failure of the adhesive in the polyurethane joints
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Number of Cycles, N
Am
pliti
de,
∆u (
mm
)
Stage 1 Stage 3Stage 2
Adhesive bond failure
Bolted joint failure
P=4.5kN
P=6.5kN
Fig. 12. Fatigue behaviour of hybrid single-lap joints.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
x 104
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
Number of Cycles, N
Bac
kfac
e S
trai
n (%
)
Bonded Side 1Bonded Side 2Hybrid Side 1Hybrid Side 2
(a)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
x 104
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
Bac
kfac
e S
trai
n (%
)
Number of Cycles, N
Bonded Side 1Bonded Side 2Hybrid Side 1Hybrid Side 2
2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 3.1 3.2
x 104
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
Bac
kfac
e S
trai
n (%
)
Number of cycles, N
A
B
(b)
Fig. 13. Backface strain measurements for bonded and hybrid joints
(t = 3.2 mm). (a) Polyurethane adhesive, (Pmax = 6 kN). (b) Epoxy
adhesive, (Pmax = 6 kN).
128 G. Kelly / Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129
occurred after a greater number of cycles in the hybrid
joint. While the number of cycles until the first crack ap-peared to be greater, no apparent change in the crack
propagation rate was observed through measurement
of the specimen compliance.
4.2.1. Backface strain measurements
Damage initiation in the bonded and hybrid joints
was detected through use of the backface strain tech-
nique. The technique was used to investigate the influ-ence of the bolt on the number of cycles to damage
initiation, Ni, in the hybrid joints with the polyurethane
and epoxy adhesive systems.
A typical plot of the backface strain versus number of
cycles for the bonded and hybrid joints with the polyure-
thane adhesive is illustrated in Fig. 13(a). The onset of
failure is shown to be delayed in the hybrid joint with
the number of cycles to failure initiation, Ni, beingapproximately double that of the bonded joint. It was
also evident that damage initiated at both ends of the
overlap at approximately the same number of cycles.
The steady increase in the backface strain after failure
initiation indicated a progressive transfer of load from
the adhesive to the bolt.
In contrast, the failure of the bonded joints with the
epoxy adhesive was sudden with fracture at one end ofthe overlap propagating rapidly through the joint (see
Fig. 13(b)). Similar behaviour was observed in the hy-
brid joint as shown in the zoomed region of Fig.
13(b). Fracture in the fillet at one end of the overlap
(A) resulted in a 50% increase in the backface strain level
at the opposite end (B). The backface strain at point B
continued to increase at a higher rate until fracture of
the fillet occurred. The sudden fracture resulted in anabrupt shift of load from the adhesive to the bolt.
Comparison of the number of cycles to failure initia-
tion in the bonded and hybrid joints with the epoxy
adhesive did not reveal any significant benefit of the hy-brid joint. While the number of cycles to failure initia-
tion was greater for the hybrid joint in comparison to
the bonded joint, in general the values of Ni were similar
for the bonded and hybrid joints. Thus, the combination
of a high modulus adhesive and a hybrid joining tech-
nique only provides benefits to structural performance/
durability after failure of the adhesive layer.
5. Conclusions
The quasi-static strength and fatigue resistance of hy-
brid (bonded/bolted) joints in composite laminates was
investigated. The load transfer distribution in the joints
was predicted using finite element analysis and the joint
structural behaviour and failure modes characterised.The effects of the adherend thickness and adhesive mate-
rial system were identified as critical parameters in the
design of hybrid joints.
It was shown that hybrid joining in combination with
a stiff epoxy adhesive offered only limited improvements
G. Kelly / Composite Structures 72 (2006) 119–129 129
in structural performance. Results from numerical simu-
lations revealed that only a small fraction of the load
was transferred by the bolt and no significant increase
in quasi-static strength was observed with the adhesive
and bolt functioning as separate joining elements. The
fatigue resistance of the joints was improved due tothe presence of the bolt. However, the bolt had limited
influence on the number of cycles to initiation of
damage.
In contrast, the combination of hybrid joining with a
flexible polyurethane adhesive produced both higher
joint strength and extended fatigue life. Bolt load trans-
fer ratios up to 35% were predicted by numerical simu-
lation and an increase in strength of between 11% and22% was measured for the hybrid joints in comparison
to adhesive bonded joints. Greater strength increase
was noted for the joints with the [0/45/90/�45]s2 lami-
nate stacking sequence in comparison to those with
the [0/45/90/�45]s stacking sequence as a result of the
higher bearing load capacity in the former laminate.
The hybrid joints with the [0/45/90/�45]s adherends
failed ultimately by net-section failure with the load lev-els in excess of those sustainable in a bolted joint. This
failure mode imposes design restrictions if redundancy
or non-catastrophic failure is required. The performance
of the hybrid joint was improved in joints with the [0/45/
90/�45]s2 adherends which had a higher bearing load
capacity.
The fatigue resistance of the hybrid joints with the
polyurethane adhesive was greater in comparison toadhesive bonded joints. Three distinct stages in the fati-
gue life were identified and backface strain measure-
ments revealed that fracture in the adhesive initiated
after a larger number of cycles in the hybrid joints for
a given load.
Hybrid joining was shown to offer potential improve-
ment in strength and fatigue life in comparison to adhe-
sive bonded joints. However, material selection andjoint design must be carefully combined to ensure an
appropriate distribution of load between the adhesive
and the bolt which is necessary to achieve improved
strength and fatigue resistance.
Acknowledgements
This work has been financially supported by the
Commission of the European Union through Growth
Project TECABS (Technologies for Carbon Fibre Rein-
forced Modular Automotive Body Structures). Dr. Ste-
fan Hallstrom is gratefully acknowledged for suggesting
valuable improvements to the paper. Ashland Speciality
Chemicals GmbH and Vantico Ltd. are gratefully
acknowledged for provision of Polyurethane and Epoxyadhesives. The Huck fastening equipment was kindly
supplied by Danielsson and Stickler AB.
References
[1] Hart-Smith LJ. Bonded-bolted composite joints. J Aircraft
1985;22(11):993–1000.
[2] Hart-Smith LJ. Design methodology for bonded-bolted composite
joints. Technical Report AFWAL-TR-81-3154, Douglas Aircraft
Company; 1982.
[3] Chan WS, Vedhagiri S. Analysis of composite bolted/bonded
joints used in repairing. J Compos Mater 2001;35(12):1045–61.
[4] Montabone M, Nebiolo M, Vigada C. An investigation on a
bolted-cold bonded joint for large diameter structures. In: 83rd
Meeting of the AGARD SMP on bolted/bonded joints in
polymeric composites, CP 590, Florence, Italy; 1996.
[5] Fu Maofeng, Mallick PK. Fatigue of hybrid (adhesive/bolted)
joints in SRIM. Int J Adhes Adhes 2001;21:145–59.
[6] Imanaka M, Haraga K, Nishikawa T. Fatigue strength of
adhesive/rivet combined lap joints. J Adhesion 1995;49:197–209.
[7] Kelly G. Load transfer in hybrid (bolted/bonded) composite
single-lap joints. J Compos Struct 2005;69(1):35–43.
[8] Zhang Z, Shang JK, Lawrence FV. A backface strain technique
for detecting fatigue crack initiation in adhesive joints. J Adhesion
1995;49:23–36.
[9] ASTM D 638 02a Standard test method for tensile properties of
plastics. American Society for Testing and Materials; 2002.
[10] Kelly G, Hallstrom S. Bearing strength of carbon fibre epoxy
laminates: Effects of bolt hole clearance. Composites Part B
2004;35(4):331–43.
[11] Crocombe A, Ong CY, Chan CM, Abdel Wahab MM, Ashcroft
IA. Investigating fatigue damage evolution in adhesive bonded
structures using backface strain measurement. J Adhesion
2002;78:745–76.
[12] Hibbet, Karlsson, and Sorensen Inc. Abaqus/standard user�smanuals, V6.4. Pawtucket, RI, USA; 2003.
[13] DiNicola AJ, Fantle SL. Bearing strength of clearance fit fastener
holes in toughened graphite/epoxy laminates. In: Composite
materials: testing and design, vol. 11. ASTM STP 1206; 1993.
p. 220–37.
[14] McCarthy MA, Lawlor VP, Stanley WF, McCarthy CT. Bolt-hole
clearance effects and strength criteria in single-bolt, single-lap,
composite bolted joints. Compos Sci Technol 2002;62(10–11):
1415–31.
[15] Truong Chi T, Lomov SV, Verpoest I. The mechanical properties
of multi-axial multi-ply carbon fabric reinforced epoxy compos-
ites. In Proceedings of the 10th European conference on compos-
ite materials (ECCM-10), Brugge, Belgium; 2002.