Master's thesis: Effect of environmental thermal cycling on the shear strength and fatigue life of adhesively bonded CFRP-AL joints

It’s time for another thesis project! You might remember the last thesis project we did together with Tommi for our Bachelor of Engineering. (Kovabikes) Thesis project: Machining a full suspension enduro bike

I managed to burn the candle at both ends getting those bikes finished and having a full time engineering position at the same time. However as soon as we were done with the project and I suddenly had all this spare time left, I convinced myself it would be a great idea to apply for a masters degree and do it while working full time :sweat_smile:

So here we are. All courses completed and with only a thesis to write.

I’ve been a bit worried about the choice of adhesive in our bikes since it has quite drastic drop of joint strength at elevated temperatures. I did underestimate the upper end of the temperature range that bikes can experience in direct sun exposure or when stored inside a van. I realized this last summer and while it’s quite easy fix to not store the bikes inside the van or just let it cool down before riding, I also had other concerns regarding the effect of environmental temperature cycling.

I managed to convince a Professor of composite materials and solid mechanics to approve my own topic for the master thesis. Preliminary title of the thesis is “Effect of environmental thermal cycling on the shear strength and fatigue life of adhesively bonded CFRP-aluminum joints”

Unfortunately the scope had to be narrowed down a bit from what I initially expected, due to limited lab access and lack of funding.

Test matrix
I made the decision to focus on executing this matrix cleanly, rather than trying to expand the matrix. Fatigue testing will be limited to only one adhesive as it would expand the test matrix a lot.
-Lap shear 3 adhesives x 2 thermal cycles (0,500) x 4 repetitive samples = 24
-Fatigue 1 adhesive x 2 thermal cycles (0,500) x 3 stress ranges x 4 repetitive samples = 24

Thermal cycling
This was the biggest practical concern. Temperature cycling takes a lot of time in the chamber. After asking a bit around the industry, I decided to go with assumption of 100 temperature cycles per year. Initial idea was to cycle the samples for 1000 cycles, but it isn’t realistic for the timeframe of the study. Ramp rates and dwell times are already a bit accelerated to fit the 500 cycles under 1 month of chamber time. Might go for 250 cycles if the temp chamber availability is limited.

Temperature range -20 to +80C
Ramp rate 5C/min
Dwell time 15 min at extreme temperatures
Time for 500 cycles: 24 days

Adhesives
I chose three commonly used adhesives by frame builders. They all offer slightly different temperature ranges and Tg.
3M DP490
Henkel Loctite EA9466
Permabond ET5429

Surface prep
Surface prep will be limited to Acetone + IPA cleaning only. While sanding can produce joints with better properties, it is a variable that is nearly impossible to control. Acetone + IPA cleaning produces the most repeatable results.

Fatigue test parameters
Stress ranges to be 30, 50 and 70% of the ultimate capacity obtained from ISO 4587 lap shear test. This will provide low, mid and high cycle fatigue results.
Frequency 10Hz
R=0,1

I need to make a bonding fixture to enable batch processing of the test samples and to be able to have a consistent bond gap. My plan is to go with a geometry like this, with the idea that I can align the specimen sheets form the grooves and control the overlap length. After curing I will cut the samples apart.

So here we go again. This time with more theoretical, but still quite an interesting topic.

Any input on what kind of expected temperature ranges, amount of cycles and lifetime of the frames you design for are welcomed. Scope can still be slightly adjusted if needed as the bonding will start on February.

Jere

8 Likes

Hi,

I am working at one of the above adhesive suppliers in testing. For the jigs we lately opt for very simple 3d printed jigs out of PLA when the adhesive is only room temperature curing. Similar to your design just with a stop at the end to define the overlap. Of course only works if you lapshears have the standard 100mm. The gap is adjusted with simple shims.

What gap thickness you’d like to go?

For temperature resistance and raising the Tg of those 2component epoxies a tempering or curing at elevated temperature is a thing. You might want to consider it.

For the cycling: Do you plan to do a temperature cycling only or will it be humidity controlled. In automotive we usually do thermal/humidity cycles combined. The humidity will influence the epoxies much more than a temperature only cycle.

Typical cycle (depending on the OEM) will be like 2weeks of something like the VW PV1200 standard (you’ll find details of the cycle online)

AND most importantly it makes sense to go for an cohesive fracture pattern first. This might require pretrials and surface modification.

Modern adhesive bonding framework (e.g. DIN EN ISO 21368) suggests that only an cohesive fracture pattern is a reliable and predictable one.

If you go with adhesion failure even after your reference cure without aging your fatigue results might be repeatable but the might also not be….

2 Likes

i think convetional wisdom is that aluminum should be sanded/etched/surface treated before bonding. I’m concerned that if you just do IPA wipe it will not be representative of ‘good practice. For the project I am working on right now I settled on DP420 on aluminum that had been chemical conversion coated (alodine). Its an easy process if you want to do that. Requires just cleaning, then etching with a solvent (alumprep 33 is what I used), then dipping in the alodine.

3 Likes

Thanks for your input, it is truly appreciated!

I was thinking of milling the jig from MDF because I’m not sure if my 3d print would be flat enough. 3D printed one would be much easier for me to manufacture though.

I’m aiming for 0,2mm bond gap.

I decided to cure it at room temp since I think most of the frame builders do it that way. For the cycling parameters I’m still a bit unsure about the humidity control as I have not got confirmation from the university on what kind of temp chamber we have available. I agree that the hygrothermal cycling would be beneficial.

The VW PV1200 seems to be quite commonly used among literature, but personally I was thinking on aiming for higher amount of cycles. Obviously the ramp rates will be accelerated to achieve that within realistic time frame in the chamber. Maybe going with the standard cycling would be on the safe side to not induce any thermal shock or other problems with the accelerated ramp rates and lower dwell times.

Good point on the cohesive failure. I just thought to go with the most repeatable surface prep, but failed to notice that my goal should be to ensure cohesive failure. I think I should do some pretrials and possibly change the surface prep to sanding if I get adhesion failures. Might be hard to fit those within the timeframe and lab availability, but I’ll try my best. Thanks for pointing that out!

This forum truly seems to be a goldmine of knowledge

1 Like