4.3 Article

On the effect of adhesive thickness on mode I fracture energy-an experimental and modelling study using a trapezoidal cohesive zone model

Journal

JOURNAL OF ADHESION
Volume 96, Issue 5, Pages 490-514

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00218464.2019.1601087

Keywords

Structural adhesive; fracture energy; cohesive zone model; finite element method; fracture mechanics

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51605072,51605074]
  2. Foundation of Hubei Key Laboratory of Hydroelectric Machinery Design Maintenance [2018KJX01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper, a combined experimental-numerical method was proposed to study the effect of adhesive thickness on mode I fracture energy of the adhesive layer, using Double Cantilever Beam (DCB) testing and Cohesive Zone Modelling (CZM). A Trapezoidal Cohesive Zone Model (TCZM) was introduced in tabular form into commercial Finite Element (FE) package to simulate the crack propagation behaviour in the adhesive layer and include the ductile characteristics of the selected adhesive. In order to overcome the difficulty in the accurate monitoring and measurement of crack length during loading, the Compliance-Based Beam Method (CBBM) was adopted to deduce the mode I strain energy release rate data. The load-displacement curve, Resistance curve (R curve), and mode I fracture energy data obtained from both experiment and simulation were analysed to validate the established FE model. It was observed that adhesive thickness has a significant influence on the ductile fracture behaviour of adhesive under mode I loading. The mode I fracture energy increases initially, and then decreases with the increase of adhesive layer thickness in the selected thickness range, while obvious transition was also observed in the perspective of micro-scale failure mechanism of the fracture surface through Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available