Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Quasi-static and Dynamic Lap Shear Strength of Aluminium Joints Bonded with Epoxy/Alumina Nanocomposite Adhesive

  • 10 Accesses

Abstract

Quasi-static shear strength of aluminium alloy single lap joints was determined as a function of wt% (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0) of spherical and rod shaped nanoalumina in epoxy adhesive under compressive loading. Static shear strength for nanoadhesive containing 1.5 wt% of nanoparticles (for both spherical and rod shaped nanoalumina) was observed to be maximum. Dynamic shear strength for neat adhesive and nanoadhesives containing 1.5 wt% of spherical and rod shaped nanoalumina were analysed at two different loading rates using a split Hopkinson pressure bar system. A significant improvement (3 to 7 times) of dynamic shear strength of joints was perceived over static shear strength of joints. Static and dynamic lap shear strength for nanoadhesive containing nanospheres were significantly more than that for neat adhesive and nanoadhesive containing nanorods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

References

  1. 1.

    Ahn J, Stapleton SE, Waas AM (2011) Advanced modeling of the behavior of bonded composite joints in aerospace applications. In: Camanho P, Tong L (eds) Composite joints and connections: principles. Modelling and testing. Woodhead Publishing, Philadelphia, pp 423–434

  2. 2.

    Chen WW, Song B (2011) Split Hopkinson (Kolsky) bar: design. Testing and applications. Springer, New York

  3. 3.

    Keisler C, Lataillade JL (1995) The effect of substrate roughness characteristics on wettability and on the mechanical properties of adhesive joints loaded at high strain rates. J Adhes Sci Technol 9:395–411. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856195X00347

  4. 4.

    Srivastava V, Shukla A, Parameswaran V (2000) Experimental evaluation of the dynamic shear strength of adhesive-bonded lap joints. J Test Eval 28:438–442. https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE12134J

  5. 5.

    Srivastava V, Parameswaran V, Shukla A, Morgan D (2002) Effect of loading rate and geometry variation on the dynamic shear strength of adhesive lap joints. In: Gdoutos EE (ed) Recent advances in experimental mechanics. Springer, Dordrecht pp 769–780. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48410-2_71

  6. 6.

    Yokoyama T (2003) Experimental determination of impact tensile properties of adhesive butt joints with the split Hopkinson bar. J Strain Anal Eng 38:233–245. https://doi.org/10.1243/030932403765310563

  7. 7.

    Adamvalli M, Parameswaran V (2008) Dynamic strength of adhesive single lap joints at high temperature. Int J Adhes Adhes 28:321–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2007.10.005

  8. 8.

    Challita G, Othman R, Guegan P (2008) New experimental sample for shear testing of adhesively bonded assemblies. Int J Mod Phys B 22:1081–1086. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979208046359

  9. 9.

    Chen X, Liu Y (2010) An experimental technique on the dynamic strength of adhesively bonded single lap joints. J Adhes Sci Technol 24:291–304. https://doi.org/10.1163/016942409X12529160192106

  10. 10.

    Raykhere SL, Kumar P, Singh RK, Parameswaran V (2010) Dynamic shear strength of adhesive joints made of metallic and composite adherents. Mater Des 31:2102–2109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2009.10.043

  11. 11.

    Sen O, Tekalur SA, Jilek C (2011) The determination of dynamic strength of single lap joints using the split Hopkinson pressure bar. Int J Adhes Adhes 31:541–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2011.04.006

  12. 12.

    Sankar HR, Adamvalli M, Kulkarni PP, Parameswaran V (2015) Dynamic strength of single lap joints with similar and dissimilar adherends. Int J Adhes Adhes 56:46–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2014.07.014

  13. 13.

    Jia Z, Yuan G, Feng X, Zou Y, Yu J (2019) Shear properties of polyurethane ductile adhesive at low temperatures under high strain rate conditions. Compos Part B 156:292–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.08.060

  14. 14.

    Machado JJM, Nunes PDP, Marques EAS, Da Silva LFM (2019) Adhesive joints using aluminium and CFRP substrates tested at low and high temperatures under quasi-static and impact conditions for the automotive industry. Compos Part B 158:102–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.09.067

  15. 15.

    Dorigato A, Pegoretti A (2011) The role of alumina nanoparticles in epoxy adhesives. J Nanopart Res 13:2429–2441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-010-0130-0

  16. 16.

    May M, Wang HM, Akid R (2010) Effects of the addition of inorganic nanoparticles on the adhesive strength of a hybrid sol–gel epoxy system. Int J Adhes Adhes 30:505–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2010.05.002

  17. 17.

    Tutunchi A, Kamali R, Kianvash A (2016) Effect of Al2O3 nanoparticles on the steel glass epoxy composite joint bonded by a two component structural acrylic adhesive. Soft Mater 14:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/1539445X.2014.1003269

  18. 18.

    Nemati Giv A, Ayatollahi MR, Ghaffari SH, Da Silva LFM (2018) Effect of reinforcements at different scales on mechanical properties of epoxy adhesives and adhesive joints: a review. J Adhes 94:1082–1121. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218464.2018.1452736

  19. 19.

    Gupta SK, Shukla DK, Ravindra DK (2019) Effect of nanoalumina in epoxy adhesive on lap shear strength and fracture toughness of aluminium joints. J Adhes. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218464.2019.1641088

  20. 20.

    Stapleton SE, Waas AM, Arnold SM (2012) Functionally graded adhesives for composite joints. Int J Adhes Adhes 35:36–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2011.11.010

  21. 21.

    ASTM D905 (2019) Standard test method for strength properties of adhesive bonds in shear by compression loading. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. https://doi.org/10.1520/D0905-08R13

  22. 22.

    Hiremath V, Shukla DK (2016) Effect of particle morphology on viscoelastic and flexural properties of epoxy alumina polymer nanocomposites. Plast Rubber Compos 45:199–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/14658011.2016.1159778

  23. 23.

    Arenas JM, Narbon JJ, Alıa C (2010) Optimum adhesive thickness in structural adhesives joints using statistical techniques based on Weibull distribution. Int J Adhes Adhes 30:160–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2009.12.003

  24. 24.

    Naik NK, Pandya KS, Kavala VR, Zhang W, Koratkar NA (2014) Alumina nanoparticle filled epoxy resin: high strain rate compressive behaviour. Polym Eng Sci 54:2896–2901. https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.23850

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the High Speed Experimental Mechanics Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, India for providing the facility of dynamic testing. Authors specially thanks the Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad, Prayagraj, India, for giving the financial support under plan grant (No. 248/R&C/14-15, 2014).

Author information

Correspondence to Sunil Kumar Gupta.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

The contact interface surfaces between joints and platens/ bars were lubricated with grease to reduce the friction and to achieve the uniform radial deformation. Figure 12 shows the loading arrangement of specimen on Universal Testing Machine for quasi-static testing. Figure 13 Shows SLJ sandwiched between incident and transmitted bars of SHPB in dynamic test.

Fig. 12
figure12

Single lap joint loaded on a universal testing machine in quasi-static test

Fig. 13
figure13

Single lap joint sandwiched between incident and transmitted bars of SHPB in dynamic test

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gupta, S.K., Shukla, D.K. Quasi-static and Dynamic Lap Shear Strength of Aluminium Joints Bonded with Epoxy/Alumina Nanocomposite Adhesive. J. dynamic behavior mater. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40870-020-00235-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Dynamic shear strength
  • Epoxy adhesive
  • Single lap joint
  • Shape of nanoalumina