Home Effect of different joint angles on the mechanical strength of adhesive-bonded scarf and double butt–lap joints
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Effect of different joint angles on the mechanical strength of adhesive-bonded scarf and double butt–lap joints

  • Cenk Yanen

    Cenk Yanen received a B.Sc. degree in Mechanical Engineering from the Mersin University in 2010 and M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from the Firat University in 2016 and 2021, respectively. His research interests include mechanic, composite material, and shear thickening fluid. He is a Research Assistant at the Department of Mechanical Engineering of the Firat University, Elazig, Turkey.

         and Murat Yavuz Solmaz

    Murat Yavuz Solmaz received his B.Sc. degree in Mechanical Engineering, M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from the Firat University in 1997, 2003, and 2008, respectively. His research interests include mechanics of solid material and composite material. He is a Professor at the Department of Mechanical Engineering of the Firat University, Elazig, Turkey.

     ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: May 9, 2022
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Submit Manuscript Author Information
Materials Testing
From the journal Materials Testing Volume 64 Issue 5

Abstract

The effect of different joint angles and joint types in adhesively bonded joints was investigated. Two joint types were chosen to examine the effect of the joint type. A total of 12 samples were produced at six different angles (30°, 45°, 52°, 60°, 75°, and 90°) to examine the effect of joint angle on the scarf and double butt–lap joint types. St 37 steel was used as the adherend material. The adhesion distance, sample thickness, and adhesion area were kept constant in the samples. There were differences in the sample widths to make the angle change by keeping the adhesive bonding length constant. 3M Scotch-Weld DP810 epoxy adhesive was used as the adhesive. The adhesive thickness was chosen as 0.1 mm. An axial tensile load was applied to the samples, and the results were recorded and evaluated. When scarf and double butt–lap joint samples are compared with each other according to their angles, it was seen that double butt–lap joints were more successful in samples with 30, 45, and 52° joint angles, and scarf lap joints were more successful in samples with 60, 75, and 90° joint angles.

Keywords: adhesive; double butt–lap joints; joint angle; scarf lap joints; tension
Corresponding author: Murat Yavuz Solmaz, Mechanical Engineering, Firat University Faculty of Engineering, Elazig, Turkey, E-mail:

About the authors

Cenk Yanen

Cenk Yanen received a B.Sc. degree in Mechanical Engineering from the Mersin University in 2010 and M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from the Firat University in 2016 and 2021, respectively. His research interests include mechanic, composite material, and shear thickening fluid. He is a Research Assistant at the Department of Mechanical Engineering of the Firat University, Elazig, Turkey.

Murat Yavuz Solmaz

Murat Yavuz Solmaz received his B.Sc. degree in Mechanical Engineering, M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from the Firat University in 1997, 2003, and 2008, respectively. His research interests include mechanics of solid material and composite material. He is a Professor at the Department of Mechanical Engineering of the Firat University, Elazig, Turkey.

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: None declared.

  3. Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this article.

References

[1] T. Şekercioğlu, “Investigation of behaviour of adhesive joints under dynamic loads,” Ph. D. dissertation, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Turkey, 2001.Search in Google Scholar

[2] R. J. C. Carbas, M. A. Dantas, E. A. S. Marques, and L. F. M. da Silva, “Effect of the adhesive thickness on butt adhesive joints under torsional loads,” J. Adv. Joining Process., vol. 3, no. 100061, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jajp.2021.100061.Search in Google Scholar

[3] C. Wu, C. Chen, L. He, and W. Yan, “Comparison on damage tolerance of scarf and stepped-lap bonded composite joints under quasi-static loading,” Compos. Part B: Eng., vol. 155, pp. 19–30, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.08.031.Search in Google Scholar

[4] J. C. P. Figueiredo, R. D. S. G. Campilho, E. A. S. Marques, J. J. M. Machado, and L. F. M. da Silva, “Adhesive thickness influence on the shear fracture toughness measurements of adhesive joints,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., vol. 83, pp. 15–23, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2018.02.015.Search in Google Scholar

[5] U. A. Khashaba and I. M. R. Najjar, “Adhesive layer analysis for scarf bonded joint in CFRE composites modified with MWCNTs under tensile and fatigue loads,” Compos. Struct., vol. 184, pp. 411–427, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.09.095.Search in Google Scholar

[6] Z. Zhan, Q. Meng, W. Hu, Y. Sun, F. Shen, and Y. Zhang, “Continuum damage mechanics based approach to study the effects of the scarf angle, surface friction and clamping force over the fatigue life of scarf bolted joints,” Int. J. Fatigue, vol. 102, pp. 59–78, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2017.04.008.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Z. Wang, C. Li, L. Sui, and G. Xian, “Effects of adhesive property and thickness on the bond performance between carbon fiber reinforced polymer laminate and steel,” Thin-Walled Struct., vol. 158, pp. 2021–107176, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.107176.Search in Google Scholar

[8] M. Cowdrey, S. Ferguson, C. Lennox, et al.., Loctite Worldwide Design Handbook, Hartford, Connecticut, USA, Loctite Corporation, 1998.Search in Google Scholar

[9] D. R. Speth, Y. P. Yang, and G. W. Ritter, “Qualification of adhesives for marine composite- -steel applications,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 55–62, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2009.08.004.Search in Google Scholar

[10] B. Golaz, V. Michaud, S. Lavanchy, and J.-A. E. Månson, “Design and durability of titanium adhesive joints for marine applications,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., vol. 45, pp. 150–157, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2013.04.003.Search in Google Scholar

[11] C. Alia, J. M. Arenas, J. C. Suárez, and P. Pinilla, “Mechanical behavior of polyurethane adhesive joints used in laminated materials for marine structures,” Ocean Eng., vol. 113, pp. 64–74, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.12.044.Search in Google Scholar

[12] A. W. Momber, L. Fröck, and T. Marquardt, “Effects of accelerated ageing on the mechanical properties of adhesive joints between stainless steel and polymeric top coat materials for marine applications,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., vol. 103, no. 102699, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2020.102699.Search in Google Scholar

[13] D. M. Antunes, V. Infante, and A. Reis, “Experimental adhesive failure criteria for analysis of aerospace structures,” Proc. Eng., vol. 114, pp. 416–421, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.08.087.Search in Google Scholar

[14] E. A. S. Marques, L. F. M. da Silva, and M. Flaviani, “Testing and simulation of mixed adhesive joints for aerospace applications,” Compos. Part B: Eng., vol. 74, pp. 123–130, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.01.005.Search in Google Scholar

[15] D. Quan, J. L. Urdániz, C. Rouge, and A. Ivanković, “The enhancement of adhesively-bonded aerospace-grade composite joints using steel fibres,” Compos. Struct., vol. 198, pp. 11–18, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.04.071.Search in Google Scholar

[16] J. Kupski and S. Teixeira de Freitas, “Design of adhesively bonded lap joints with laminated CFRP adherends: review, challenges and new opportunities for aerospace structures,” Compos. Struct., vol. 268, no. 113923, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.113923.Search in Google Scholar

[17] J.-H. Back, J.-U. Hwang, Y.-H. Lee, et al.., “Morphological study and mechanical property of epoxy-foam adhesives based on epoxy composites for automotive applications,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., vol. 87, pp. 124–129, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2018.09.010.Search in Google Scholar

[18] J. J. M. Machado, P. D. P. Nunes, E. A. S. Marques, and L. F. M. da Silva, “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: Eng., vol. 158, pp. 102–116, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.09.067.Search in Google Scholar

[19] C. Zhang, L. Sun, B. Huang, X. Yang, Y. Chu, and B. Zhan, “Electrical and mechanical properties of CNT/CB dual filler conductive adhesives (DFCAs) for automotive multi-material joints,” Compos. Struct., vol. 225, no. 111183, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111183.Search in Google Scholar

[20] J. M. Arenas, C. Alía, J. J. Narbón, R. Ocaña, and C. González, “Considerations for the industrial application of structural adhesive joints in the aluminium–composite material bonding,” Compos. Part B: Eng., vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 417–423, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.04.026.Search in Google Scholar

[21] İ. Y. Sülü and Ş. Temiz, “Mechanical behavior of composite pipes joined with non-embedded and embedded adhesive layers,” Mater. Test., vol. 62, no. 12, pp. 1228–1234, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3139/120.111608.Search in Google Scholar

[22] M. Solmaz and A. Turgut, “An experimental and numerical study on the effects of taper angles and overlap length on the failure and stress distribution of adhesively-bonded single-lap joints,” Math. Comput. Appl., vol. 16, pp. 159–170, 2011, https://doi.org/10.3390/mca16010159.Search in Google Scholar

[23] İ. Saraç, H. Adin, and Ş. Temiz, “Experimental determination of the static and fatigue strength of the adhesive joints bonded by epoxy adhesive including different particles,” Compos. Part B: Eng., vol. 155, pp. 92–103, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.08.006.Search in Google Scholar

[24] İ. Saraç, H. Adin, and Ş. Temiz, “Investigation of the effect of use of Nano-Al2O3, Nano-TiO2 and Nano-SiO2 powders on strength of single lap joints bonded with epoxy adhesive,” Compos. Part B: Eng., vol. 166, pp. 472–482, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.02.007.Search in Google Scholar

[25] S. Akpinar and I. A. Akpinar, “Effect of nanostructured reinforcement of adhesive on thermal cycling performance of a single-lap joint with composite adherends,” Compos. Part B: Eng., vol. 175, p. 107106, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107106.Search in Google Scholar

[26] M. Y. Solmaz and T. Topkaya, “Progressive failure analysis in adhesively, riveted, and hybrid bonded double-lap joints,” J. Adhesion, vol. 89, no. 11, pp. 822–836, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1080/00218464.2013.765800.Search in Google Scholar

[27] İ. Kocabaş, M. Y. Solmaz, and M. Gür, “Effect of riveting on the joint strength of adhesively bonded double lap joints,” Anadolu Univ. J. Sci. Technol.-A Appl. Sci. Eng., p. 1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.18038/Aubtda.330521.Search in Google Scholar

[28] M. Ş. Adin and E. Kılıçkap, “Strength of double-reinforced adhesive joints,” Mater. Test., vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 176–181, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1515/mt-2020-0024.Search in Google Scholar

[29] E. Gavgali, R. Sahin, and S. Akpinar, “An investigation of the fatigue performance of adhesively bonded step-lap joints: an experimental and numerical analysis,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., vol. 104, p. 102736, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2020.102736.Search in Google Scholar

[30] S. Bayramoglu, K. Demir, and S. Akpinar, “Investigation of internal step and metal part reinforcement on joint strength in the adhesively bonded joint: Experimental and numerical analysis,” Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech., vol. 108, no. 102613, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2020.102613.Search in Google Scholar

[31] Y. Ayaz, Ç. Şerif, “Mechanical behavior of butt curved adhesive joints subjected to bending,” Mater. Test., vol. 63, no. 7, pp. 639–644, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1515/mt-2020-0089.Search in Google Scholar

[32] H. Adin, “The effect of angle on the strain of scarf lap joints subjected to tensile loads,” Appl. Math. Modell., vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 2858–2867, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2011.09.079.Search in Google Scholar

[33] H. Adin, “The investigation of the effect of angle on the failure load and strength of scarf lap joints,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 24–31, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2012.04.010.Search in Google Scholar

[34] H. Adin, “Effect of overlap length and scarf angle on the mechanical properties of different adhesive joints subjected to tensile loads,” Mater. Test., vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 536–546, 2017. https://doi.org/10.3139/120.111031.Search in Google Scholar

[35] M. K. Apalak, R. Güneş, and L. Fı́danci, “Geometrically non-linear thermal stress analysis of an adhesively bonded tubular single lap joint,” Finite Elem. Anal. Des., vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 155–174, 2003, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-874X(02)00062-8.Search in Google Scholar

[36] S. Jeong Lee and D. Gil Lee, “Development of a fatigue failure model for the adhesively bonded tubular single lap joint under dynamic torsional loading,” J. Adhesion, vol. 56, nos. 1–4, pp. 157–169, 1996, https://doi.org/10.1080/00218469608010505.Search in Google Scholar

[37] A. Ozel, F. Kadioglu, S. Sen, and R. Sadeler, “Finite element analysis of adhesive joints in four-point bending load,” J. Adhesion, vol. 79, no. 7, pp. 683–697, https://doi.org/10.1080/00218460309579.Search in Google Scholar

[38] W. Ramani and K. Zhao, “The evaluation of residual stresses in thermoplastic bonding to metal,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., vol. 17, pp. 353–357, 1997.10.1016/S0143-7496(97)00030-4Search in Google Scholar

[39] M. F. S. F. de Moura, R. Daniaud, and A. G. Magalhães, “Simulation of mechanical behaviour of composite bonded joints containing strip defects,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 464–473, 2006, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2005.06.010.Search in Google Scholar

[40] D. He, T. Sawa, T. Iwamoto, and Y. Hirayama, “Stress analysis and strength evaluation of scarf adhesive joints subjected to static tensile loadings,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 387–392, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2010.02.002.Search in Google Scholar

[41] Y. Hua, L. Gu, and M. Trogdon, “Three-dimensional modeling of carbon/epoxy to titanium single-lap joints with variable adhesive recess length,” Int. J. Adhes. Adhes., vol. 38, pp. 25–30, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2012.06.003.Search in Google Scholar

[42] K. Turan and M. Kaman, “Progressive failure analysis on the single lap bonded joints,” Pamukkale Univ. J. Eng. Sci., vol. 16, pp. 315–323, 2011.Search in Google Scholar

[43] M. Y. Solmaz, Mechanical Analysis and Design of Adhesive Bonded Joints, Ph.D. dissertation, Elazig, Turkey, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Fırat University, 2008.Search in Google Scholar

[44] Y. Suzuki, “Adhesive tensile strengths of scarf and butt joints of steel plates (relation between adhesive layer thicknesses and adhesive strengths of joints): solid-mechanics, strength of materials,” JSME Int. J., vol. 30, no. 265, pp. 1042–1051, 1987, https://doi.org/10.1299/jsme1987.30.1042.Search in Google Scholar

[45] D. He, T. Sawa, and A. Karami, “Stress analysis and strength evaluation of scarf adhesive joints with dissimilar adherends subjected to static tensile loadings,” J. Solid Mech. Mater. Eng., vol. 3, no. 8, pp. 1033–1044, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1299/jmmp.3.1033.Search in Google Scholar
Published Online: 2022-05-09
Published in Print: 2022-05-25

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Experimental and dynamic thermal numerical investigation of a climate test chamber
  3. Influence of high-temperature, high-pressure, and acidic conditions on the structure and properties of high-performance organic fibers
  4. Microstructure analysis and mechanical properties of electron beam powder bed fusion (PBF-EB)-manufactured γ-titanium aluminide (TiAl) at elevated temperatures
  5. Microstructural evolution and impression creep properties of a lead-based alloy PbSn16Sb16Cu2
  6. Laser and TIG welding of additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V parts
  7. Investigation of the hydrogen embrittlement susceptibility of steel components during thin-film hot-dip galvanizing
  8. Effects of coating, holding force, stretching height, yield stress, and surface roughness on springback of steel in the V-stretch bending test
  9. Gradient-based optimizer for economic optimization of engineering problems
  10. Failure investigation of a spline half-shaft in a loader rickshaw differential system
  11. Manta ray foraging optimization algorithm and hybrid Taguchi salp swarm-Nelder–Mead algorithm for the structural design of engineering components
  12. Effect of tool rotational speed and position on mechanical and microstructural properties of friction stir welded dissimilar alloys AZ31B Mg and Al6061
  13. Effect of different joint angles on the mechanical strength of adhesive-bonded scarf and double butt–lap joints
  14. Buckling behavior of laminated composites with embedded delaminations
  15. Comparison of pull-out behavior of glass, basalt, and carbon rovings embedded in fine-grain concrete and geopolymer
https://doi.org/10.1515/mt-2021-2054
Keywords for this article
adhesive; double butt–lap joints; joint angle; scarf lap joints; tension

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Experimental and dynamic thermal numerical investigation of a climate test chamber
  3. Influence of high-temperature, high-pressure, and acidic conditions on the structure and properties of high-performance organic fibers
  4. Microstructure analysis and mechanical properties of electron beam powder bed fusion (PBF-EB)-manufactured γ-titanium aluminide (TiAl) at elevated temperatures
  5. Microstructural evolution and impression creep properties of a lead-based alloy PbSn16Sb16Cu2
  6. Laser and TIG welding of additive manufactured Ti-6Al-4V parts
  7. Investigation of the hydrogen embrittlement susceptibility of steel components during thin-film hot-dip galvanizing
  8. Effects of coating, holding force, stretching height, yield stress, and surface roughness on springback of steel in the V-stretch bending test
  9. Gradient-based optimizer for economic optimization of engineering problems
  10. Failure investigation of a spline half-shaft in a loader rickshaw differential system
  11. Manta ray foraging optimization algorithm and hybrid Taguchi salp swarm-Nelder–Mead algorithm for the structural design of engineering components
  12. Effect of tool rotational speed and position on mechanical and microstructural properties of friction stir welded dissimilar alloys AZ31B Mg and Al6061
  13. Effect of different joint angles on the mechanical strength of adhesive-bonded scarf and double butt–lap joints
  14. Buckling behavior of laminated composites with embedded delaminations
  15. Comparison of pull-out behavior of glass, basalt, and carbon rovings embedded in fine-grain concrete and geopolymer
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 8.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/mt-2021-2054/html
Scroll to top button