PSI - Issue 54

D.F.T. Carvalho et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 54 (2024) 398–405 Carvalho et al. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

402

5

a)

b)

16

16

12

12

8

8

P m [kN]

P m [kN]

4

4

0

0

0

12.5

25

37.5

50

0

12.5

25

37.5

50

L O [mm]

L O [mm]

Experimental

Numerical

Experimental

Numerical

Fig. 2. Experimental and numerical P m data for the DAJ bonded with the 7752-2015-7752 (a) and 7752-AV-7752 (b) configurations.

3.2. Joint strength The numerical strength prediction results that were under analysis in this work are presented and listed for the SAJ and the DAJ with the three configurations considered. In order to discuss the results, the percentile variation of the P m for each joint configuration with respect to the AV138 SAJ, which is considered the reference configuration, is presented. The P m obtained numerically for the SAJ and for the 12.5/75/12.5 (a), 25/50/25 (b) or 33/34/33 (c) configurations of the DAJ is depicted in Fig. 3. a) b)

16

16

12

12

8

8

P m [N]

P m [N]

4

4

0

0

12.5

25

37.5

50

12.5

25

37.5

50

L O [mm]

L O [mm]

AV138

2015

7752

AV138

2015

7752

2015-AV-2015

7752-2015-7752 7752-AV-7752

2015-AV-2015

7752-2015-7752 7752-AV-7752

16

12

8

P m [N]

4

0

12.5

25

37.5

50

L O [mm]

AV138

2015

7752

c)

2015-AV-2015

7752-2015-7752 7752-AV-7752

Fig. 3. Numerical P m for the SAJ and either the 12.5/75/12.5 (a), 25/50/25 (b) or 33/34/33 (c) DAJ configurations.

The subsequent analysis is categorised accordingly to the three DAJ configurations, along with a final overview. For the 12.5/75/12.5 (Figure 5a) configuration the most favourable performance is observed with the 7752-2015-7752 DAJ, for L O of 12.5 mm and 25 mm. Similarly, both the 7752-2015-7752 and 7752-AV-7752 DAJ configurations perform well for L O of 37.5 mm and 50 mm. The use of AV138 adhesive with the SAJ (leads to the lowest P m across