Standard specimen geometries do not always lead to consistent fatigue results for epoxy adhesives

IF 5.7 2区材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL

International Journal of Fatigue Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2024.108600

Filippo Mannino , Dharun V. Srinivasan , Daniele Fanteria , Anastasios P. Vassilopoulos

{"title":"Standard specimen geometries do not always lead to consistent fatigue results for epoxy adhesives","authors":"Filippo Mannino , Dharun V. Srinivasan , Daniele Fanteria , Anastasios P. Vassilopoulos","doi":"10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2024.108600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper questions the recommendation regarding the use of standard specimen geometries, (Type I, Type II, and Type IV), for estimating the tensile quasi-static and fatigue properties of structural epoxy adhesives. The work presents results from an experimental program investigating the performance of structural epoxy adhesives indicating a significant effect of the specimen geometry, especially when referring to fatigue loading. Simple finite element models are also developed to facilitate the comparison of the stress distribution along the three specimen geometries. The fatigue experimental results allowed the derivation of probabilistic S-N curves, showing higher fatigue sensitivity of Type I specimens compared to Type II and IV. Furthermore, probability distribution function (PDF) curves of the equivalent static strength estimated by using Sendeckyj’s wear-out model attributed lower mean strength and higher variance for Type I specimens validating the fatigue data.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":14112,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Fatigue","volume":"190 ","pages":"Article 108600"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142112324004596/pdfft?md5=5d7f9a85cf87efc6bfb06a90efb5c9e7&pid=1-s2.0-S0142112324004596-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Fatigue","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142112324004596","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper questions the recommendation regarding the use of standard specimen geometries, (Type I, Type II, and Type IV), for estimating the tensile quasi-static and fatigue properties of structural epoxy adhesives. The work presents results from an experimental program investigating the performance of structural epoxy adhesives indicating a significant effect of the specimen geometry, especially when referring to fatigue loading. Simple finite element models are also developed to facilitate the comparison of the stress distribution along the three specimen geometries. The fatigue experimental results allowed the derivation of probabilistic S-N curves, showing higher fatigue sensitivity of Type I specimens compared to Type II and IV. Furthermore, probability distribution function (PDF) curves of the equivalent static strength estimated by using Sendeckyj’s wear-out model attributed lower mean strength and higher variance for Type I specimens validating the fatigue data.

查看原文本刊更多论文

标准试样几何形状并不总能使环氧树脂粘合剂获得一致的疲劳结果

本文对使用标准试样几何形状（I 型、II 型和 IV 型）估算结构性环氧树脂粘合剂的拉伸准静态和疲劳性能的建议提出质疑。这项工作介绍了一项实验计划的结果，该计划调查了结构性环氧树脂粘合剂的性能，结果表明试样几何形状具有显著影响，尤其是在疲劳加载时。此外，还开发了简单的有限元模型，以便于比较三种试样几何形状的应力分布。疲劳实验结果可以推导出概率 S-N 曲线，显示与 II 型和 IV 型试样相比，I 型试样的疲劳敏感性更高。此外，使用 Sendeckyj 磨损模型估算的等效静态强度概率分布函数 (PDF) 曲线表明，I 型试样的平均强度较低，方差较大，这验证了疲劳数据的正确性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

International Journal of Fatigue 工程技术-材料科学：综合

CiteScore

10.70

自引率

21.70%

发文量

619

审稿时长

58 days

期刊介绍： Typical subjects discussed in International Journal of Fatigue address: Novel fatigue testing and characterization methods (new kinds of fatigue tests, critical evaluation of existing methods, in situ measurement of fatigue degradation, non-contact field measurements) Multiaxial fatigue and complex loading effects of materials and structures, exploring state-of-the-art concepts in degradation under cyclic loading Fatigue in the very high cycle regime, including failure mode transitions from surface to subsurface, effects of surface treatment, processing, and loading conditions Modeling (including degradation processes and related driving forces, multiscale/multi-resolution methods, computational hierarchical and concurrent methods for coupled component and material responses, novel methods for notch root analysis, fracture mechanics, damage mechanics, crack growth kinetics, life prediction and durability, and prediction of stochastic fatigue behavior reflecting microstructure and service conditions) Models for early stages of fatigue crack formation and growth that explicitly consider microstructure and relevant materials science aspects Understanding the influence or manufacturing and processing route on fatigue degradation, and embedding this understanding in more predictive schemes for mitigation and design against fatigue Prognosis and damage state awareness (including sensors, monitoring, methodology, interactive control, accelerated methods, data interpretation) Applications of technologies associated with fatigue and their implications for structural integrity and reliability. This includes issues related to design, operation and maintenance, i.e., life cycle engineering Smart materials and structures that can sense and mitigate fatigue degradation Fatigue of devices and structures at small scales, including effects of process route and surfaces/interfaces.