Cargando…

Comparison of Tensile Strength and Fracture Toughness of Co-Bonded and Cold-Bonded Carbon Fiber Laminate-Aluminum Adhesive Joints

The purpose of this work is to compare the co-bonding vs. cold-bonding route on the adhesive joint performance of a CFRP (Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer) laminate–aluminum connection. In particular, the overlap shear, tensile strength and Mode I and Mode II fracture toughness will be evaluated. The...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moroni, Fabrizio, Pirondi, Alessandro, Pernechele, Chiara, Vescovi, Luca
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8307502/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34300697
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14143778
_version_ 1783728064756187136
author Moroni, Fabrizio
Pirondi, Alessandro
Pernechele, Chiara
Vescovi, Luca
author_facet Moroni, Fabrizio
Pirondi, Alessandro
Pernechele, Chiara
Vescovi, Luca
author_sort Moroni, Fabrizio
collection PubMed
description The purpose of this work is to compare the co-bonding vs. cold-bonding route on the adhesive joint performance of a CFRP (Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer) laminate–aluminum connection. In particular, the overlap shear, tensile strength and Mode I and Mode II fracture toughness will be evaluated. The adhesives for co-bonding and cold-bonding are, respectively, a thermosetting modified epoxy, unsupported structural film and a two-component epoxy adhesive, chosen as representative of applications in the high-performance/race car field. The emerging trend is that, in tensile e Mode I fracture tests, the failure path is predominantly in the composite. Mode II fracture tests instead resulted in a cohesive fracture, meaning that, under pure shear loading, the weakest link may not be the composite. The lap-shear tests are placed midway (cohesive failure for co-bonding and composite delamination for cold-bonding, respectively), probably due to the different peel stress values related to the different adhesive Young’s modulus. The exploitation of the full capacity of the adhesive joint, hence the possibility of highlighting better, different performances of co-bonding vs. cold-bonding, would require consistent improvement of the out-of-plane strength of the CFRP laminate and/or to someway redistribute the peel stress on the bondline.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8307502
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83075022021-07-25 Comparison of Tensile Strength and Fracture Toughness of Co-Bonded and Cold-Bonded Carbon Fiber Laminate-Aluminum Adhesive Joints Moroni, Fabrizio Pirondi, Alessandro Pernechele, Chiara Vescovi, Luca Materials (Basel) Article The purpose of this work is to compare the co-bonding vs. cold-bonding route on the adhesive joint performance of a CFRP (Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer) laminate–aluminum connection. In particular, the overlap shear, tensile strength and Mode I and Mode II fracture toughness will be evaluated. The adhesives for co-bonding and cold-bonding are, respectively, a thermosetting modified epoxy, unsupported structural film and a two-component epoxy adhesive, chosen as representative of applications in the high-performance/race car field. The emerging trend is that, in tensile e Mode I fracture tests, the failure path is predominantly in the composite. Mode II fracture tests instead resulted in a cohesive fracture, meaning that, under pure shear loading, the weakest link may not be the composite. The lap-shear tests are placed midway (cohesive failure for co-bonding and composite delamination for cold-bonding, respectively), probably due to the different peel stress values related to the different adhesive Young’s modulus. The exploitation of the full capacity of the adhesive joint, hence the possibility of highlighting better, different performances of co-bonding vs. cold-bonding, would require consistent improvement of the out-of-plane strength of the CFRP laminate and/or to someway redistribute the peel stress on the bondline. MDPI 2021-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8307502/ /pubmed/34300697 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14143778 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Moroni, Fabrizio
Pirondi, Alessandro
Pernechele, Chiara
Vescovi, Luca
Comparison of Tensile Strength and Fracture Toughness of Co-Bonded and Cold-Bonded Carbon Fiber Laminate-Aluminum Adhesive Joints
title Comparison of Tensile Strength and Fracture Toughness of Co-Bonded and Cold-Bonded Carbon Fiber Laminate-Aluminum Adhesive Joints
title_full Comparison of Tensile Strength and Fracture Toughness of Co-Bonded and Cold-Bonded Carbon Fiber Laminate-Aluminum Adhesive Joints
title_fullStr Comparison of Tensile Strength and Fracture Toughness of Co-Bonded and Cold-Bonded Carbon Fiber Laminate-Aluminum Adhesive Joints
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Tensile Strength and Fracture Toughness of Co-Bonded and Cold-Bonded Carbon Fiber Laminate-Aluminum Adhesive Joints
title_short Comparison of Tensile Strength and Fracture Toughness of Co-Bonded and Cold-Bonded Carbon Fiber Laminate-Aluminum Adhesive Joints
title_sort comparison of tensile strength and fracture toughness of co-bonded and cold-bonded carbon fiber laminate-aluminum adhesive joints
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8307502/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34300697
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14143778
work_keys_str_mv AT moronifabrizio comparisonoftensilestrengthandfracturetoughnessofcobondedandcoldbondedcarbonfiberlaminatealuminumadhesivejoints
AT pirondialessandro comparisonoftensilestrengthandfracturetoughnessofcobondedandcoldbondedcarbonfiberlaminatealuminumadhesivejoints
AT pernechelechiara comparisonoftensilestrengthandfracturetoughnessofcobondedandcoldbondedcarbonfiberlaminatealuminumadhesivejoints
AT vescoviluca comparisonoftensilestrengthandfracturetoughnessofcobondedandcoldbondedcarbonfiberlaminatealuminumadhesivejoints