Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Stress analysis of multi-bolted joints for FRP pultruded composite structures

Luciano Feo a, Gianfranco Marra a,⇑, Ayman S. Mosallam b
a
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Salerno, Italy, 84084 Fisciano (SA), Italy
b
Department of Civil & Env. Engineering, University of California, Irvine, 92697 CA, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In the last decades, FRP composites have been widely used for constructing entire civil structures. One of
Available online 4 July 2012 the challenging issues for building with pultruded FRP composites is understanding the behaviour of
bolted joints. In this paper, the results of a numerical analysis performed on different types of bolted
Keywords: composite joints with different geometry and subjected to tensile loads are reported. The aim of this
Glass fibers study is to examine the distribution of shear stresses among the different bolts by varying the number
Stress concentrations of rows of bolts as well as the number of bolts per row. The study also considers the presence of variable
Strength
diameter washers and their influence on the bearing stresses of composites with different fibre orienta-
Finite element analysis (FEA)
Pultrusion
tions. For verification of the validity of the analytical models, numerical results are compared to exper-
imental results reported elsewhere. The results of this study showed that in multi-bolt joints, the load
is not distributed equally due to varying bolt position, bolt-hole clearance, bolt-torque or tightening of
the bolt, friction between member plates and at washer-plate interface. The results also indicated that
in the presence of washers, the stress distributions in the fibre direction, varying fibre inclinations, are
decreasing for each value of washer pressure.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction developing and publishing several technical documents, design

Until early 1990s, the use of fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP)
composites was almost limited to only aerospace and military
applications. By the mid-1990s, civil engineers started to realize
the advantages of such materials especially in the structural repair
and rehabilitation of existing reinforced concrete bridges and
buildings. Limited interest for the all-composite structure applica-
tions was due to several factors including lack of standards and de-
sign guidelines, lack of experience of designing structures with
anisotropic and viscoelastic properties, and most importantly the
lack of proper and reliable joining details. However, in the last dec-
ade or so, a relatively large number of studies have been reported
on the characterization of composite materials for civil engineering
applications, with a focus on pultruded composites. This was real-
ized by initiating several demonstration projects where compos-
ites where used as load-bearing components such as bridge
decks, pedestrian bridges, platforms and recently in the construc-
tion of high bridges [1]. Another factor for increasing the interest
of civil engineers nowadays in composites is the active movements
of several technical and professional organizations in the USA (e.g.
American Society of Civil Engineers – ASCE, American Concrete
Institute – ACI), and Europe as well as in Asia and Australia in
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gimarra@unisa.it (G. Marra).
guides, and standards [2,3].
Bolted composite joints are the most common forms of connec-
tions in civil engineering applications.
Adhesively bonded joints generally result in a catastrophic ‘‘no-
warning’’ failure. If a higher degree of end restraint is required,
combined bolted/bonded joints may be considered. Combined
composite joints will minimize the stress concentration at the
bolt/hole zone by producing better stress distribution between
the connected elements. Test results obtained by Mosallam et al.
[4] indicated that an increase in joint ductility could be achieved
by using combined joints. However, the efficiency of any joint will
depend on several factors, including type of adhesive(s), surface
preparation, curing process, surrounding environment, applied tor-
que, edge distance, and other geometrical ratios for the connecting
elements and connection geometry and lay-up.
2. Related research
The vast majority of bolted composite joints research was gen-
erated by the aerospace industry and the focus was generally on
joining techniques for advanced composites applicable for aero-
space applications. However, some of the basic research is applica-
ble for civil engineering applications that utilize pultruded
composites. One of the essential differences between joint design
methodology used by civil engineers is the need of framing con-
nections between members (e.g., beams, columns, etc.) while the

0263-8223/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2012.06.017
3770 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780
Fig. 1. Typical failure modes of the bolted joints: (a) net tension failure; (b) shear-out failure; (c) bearing failure; (d) fastener shear failure.
Table 1
Mechanical Properties.
Ex (MPa) Ey (MPa) Ez (MPa) Gxy (MPa)
25,000 25,000 8500 3000
majority of aerospace joining focus is on shell composite struc-
tures. In addition, pultruded materials are different in nature and
production method than those produced by the aerospace industry
using autoclaves, Vacuum-Assisted Resin Transfer Molding
(VARTM) and other high-performance manufacturing methods
that are usually performed at higher temperature. In addition,
and due to the nature of the pultrusion process, the arrangement
of the fibers in the pultruded profiles are not considered identical
to laminated composites produced for aerospace applications, that
renders it slightly different when applying the Classical Lamination
Theory (CLT). Another important difference between civil and aero-
space composite joints is the loading pattern both mechanical,
thermal and environmental.
Work on investigating the use of bolted joints for composite
structures began in the United States in the mid-1960s by the aero-
space industry; refer to the MIL 17-Handbook [5]. For pultruded
composite joints, one of the pioneering comprehensive studies
was conducted by Rosner in [6] where he reported the results of
an experimental and theoretical research program on bolted con-
nections for PFRP in [7].
In particular, the experimental program involved testing a total
of 102 single-bolt double-shear lap joints to study the effects of
several design variables, including member thickness, (t); member
width, (w); to-hole diameter (d), w/d; edge distance (e), to-hole
diameter ratio, (e/d), and fibre orientation. A total of 215 pultruded
composite bolted joint specimens were tested to determine
compression, tensile, and shear properties of the material. Three
unidirectional fibre orientations were tested, namely, 0°, 45° and
mxy
90°. The different joint failure modes are described by a finite ele-
0.23 ment model (FEM) based on the Tsai-Wu failure criterion, used to
predict the behaviour of each joint. The finite-element model ac-
counts for through-the-thickness effects and fastener plate contact
action. The results of this study indicated that connection strength
could be improved by increasing one or more of the following vari-
ables: (1) member thickness, (2) w/d ratio, (3) e/d ratio, and (4) the
member width. As a continuation of the Rosner research, Hassan
[7] conducted another comprehensive experimental and analytical
study where a total of 115 multi-bolted, double-lap pultruded
composite joints with five different configurations were tested.
Among the major findings concluded from this study, it was found
that the increase in the ultimate strength of pultruded multi-
bolted joints is not directly proportional to the increase in the
number of bolts.
The effect of loading direction with respect to a member’s pul-
trusion axis on PFRP bolted joint behaviour was examined by Pra-
bhakaran et al. [8]. In their study, 105 specimens were tested to
investigate the influence of the angle between the loading direc-
tion and the pultrusion direction. The bolted joint test specimens
were fabricated from E-glass/polyester pultruded flat plates. Tests
were performed on unnotched, pin-loaded specimens. Three pin-
loaded joints were tested for each orientation angle, h, for 0° to
90° in steps of 15°. A similar study was reported by Turvey [9]
where he performed an experimental study on several PFRP joints
that were fabricated from a 1=4 -in. (6.4 mm) thick E-glass/polyester
pultruded flat plate. This PFRP flat plate was twice the thickness
used by Prabhakaran et al. [8] manufactured by the Strongwell
Company. The reported data and conclusions clearly indicate that
Turvey was not aware of the work of Prabhakaran et al. (1996a).
 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780 3771

Fig. 2. Joints geometry (dimensions in mm): (a) J11; (b) J21; (c) J22; (d) J33; (e) J44.
3772 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780
Fig. 3. Finite elements mesh of joints: (a) J11; (b) J21; (c) J22; (d) J33; (e) J44.
The two investigations used different parameters, such as thick-
ness, material manufacturer and test setup. Nevertheless, Turvey’s
study [9] confirmed the conclusions of the earlier Prabhakaran
et al. [8] study. Yuan and Liu [10] investigated the effect of several
parameters on the behaviour of composite bolted joints, including
the alignment of fibers with respect to the loading direction. Based
on the experimental results of the study, it was concluded that the
joint ultimate strength decreases as the fibre-to-load direction in-
creases in a linear fashion. It was also observed that a fibre-to-load
direction of less than 45° resulted in a ductile mode of failure,
while a brittle failure mode was observed for joints with a fibre-
to-load direction greater than 45°.
Several researchers have studied bolted joints [10,11] and their
typical failure modes [12–27] by varying, for example, the diame-
ter of the bolts and the washers, the distances between the holes,
the distances of the holes from the edges and the fibre orientations
with respect to the load direction. A state-of-the-art summary of
research work on pultruded composites can be found in Chapters
2 and 3 of Ref. [14].
In this paper, both numerical and full-scale experimental stud-
ies are presented. The results of a numerical finite element analysis
are reported to show the bearing stresses distribution around the
holes and the shear stresses distribution between bolts [9–27],
considering the presence and influence of variable diameter wash-
ers on the bearing stresses by varying the inclination of fibers in
the layers of the composite. In fact, in multi-bolt joints the load
is not distributed equally due to varying bolt position, bolt-hole
clearance, bolt-torque or tightening of the bolt, friction between
member plates and at washer-plate interface. This analytical
method is capable of analyzing realistic behaviour and the load dis-
tribution in multi-bolt composite joints [25–35]. The experimental
set-up and results developed by the authors are also presented in
order to validate the numerical results obtained.
3. Bolted joints failure modes
In general, there are six modes of failure for pultruded compos-
ite bolted joints subjected to tensile forces:
(1) Net Tension Failure.
(2) Shear-out Failure.
(3) Bearing Failure.
(4) Bolt Failure.
(5) Cleavage-Tension Failure (Tension and Shear-out Failure).
(6) Punching Failure (Bolt Pulling through Laminate).
(7) Any Combination of the above modes.
 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780 3773

Fig. 4. Distribution of normal stress ryy around the hole in the joints: (a) J11; (b) J21; (c) J22; (d) J33; (e) J44.

Table 2
Shear stress distribution coefficients for each bolt and each row of bolts obtained by FEM analysis-J33.
Joint J33 Row 1 (%) Row 2 (%) Row 3 (%)

ROW1 ROW2 ROW3

e 12.1 9.4 12.1
i 11.8 9.2 11.8
e
e 12.1 9.4 12.1

Total 36.0 28.0 36.0

In particular the net-section tension strength of a bolted com-
posite is a function of both joint geometry and composite material
strength. The associated failure mechanism is assumed to be
caused by tangential or compression stresses at the hole edge
and is likely to occur when the hole-diameter-to-width ratio (d/
w) is large and the bypass-to-bearing-load ratio is high. In this
case, the cracks will propagate in a transverse direction to load
direction (Fig. 1a).
Shear-out failure (Fig. 1b) is due to shear stresses acting parallel
to the shear stress direction in the bolt. It generally occurs when
the distance e from the free edge of the plate is small. Shear-out
failures should be regarded as a special case of bearing failures.
In most cases, the shear-out failure is a consequence of a bearing
failure with a short edge distance. However, for highly orthotropic
composites, shear-out failures occur at very large edge distances.
Shear-out failure is a combination of in-plane and interlaminar
shear failures. The shear-out failure can also be characterized by
a single plane ‘‘cleavage’’ failure, where the apparent laminate
transverse tensile strength is less than the corresponding in-plane
shear strength. Bolted composite joints are usually designed to
avoid this brittle mode of failure. Bearing failure (Fig. 1c) occurs
in the contact area between the bolt and hole where the highest
stresses are located. When the shear stresses determine bolt fail-
ure, fastener shear failure then occurs (Fig. 1d). For composite
bolted joints, the bearing failure mode is much less catastrophic
than other failure modes (e.g., tensile or shear modes) (ASCE
MOP 102, 2011). In order to ensure an efficient bolted joint design,
the bearing stress should be kept as low as possible on the most
3774 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780

Table 3
Shear stress distribution coefficients for each bolt and each row of bolts obtained by FEM analysis-J44.
Joint J44 Row 1 (%) Row 2 (%) Row 3 (%) Row 4 (%)

ROW 1 ROW 2 ROW 3 ROW 4

e 7.9 4.9 4.9 7.9
i 7.6 4.6 4.6 7.6
e
i 7.6 4.6 4.6 7.6
e 7.9 4.9 4.9 7.9
i

Total 31.0 19.0 19.0 31.0

Table 4 Bolt pulling through laminate failure mode is frequently asso-

Shear stress distribution coefficients for each row of bolts obtained by FEM analysis. ciated with countersunk fasteners that are not common for pul-
Joint Row 1 (%) Row 2 (%) Row 3 (%) Row 4 (%) truded shapes. This failure mode is likely to occur for joints
with a sufficiently large thickness-to-bolt hole diameter (t/d). In
J11 100 – – –
J22 50 50 – – this case, the bolt head is pulled through the laminate after bolt
J33 36 28 36 – bending. This failure mode may also vary, for any given geometry,
J44 31 19 19 31 as a function of the joined pultruded member laminate fibre
architecture.

Table 5 4. Finite element analysis

Shear stress distribution coefficients for each row of bolts suggested by CNR-DT 205/
2007 and normalized in respect to the resulting shear stress.
4.1. Without washers
Joint Row 1 (%) Row 2 (%) Row 3 (%) Row 4 (%)
J11 100 – – – The finite-element analysis has been developed by using the
J22 50 50 – – commercial software Straus7.
J33 41 18 41 -
In particular, five types of PFRP double-overlap joints are
J44 29 21 21 29
studied:

(1) Joint J11: one row of bolts, one bolt per row.
critical fastener in the composite structure. The use of stronger fas- (2) Joint J21: two rows of bolts, one bolt per row.
teners will require a higher bearing strength, which are not typi- (3) Joint J22: two rows of bolts, two bolts per row.
cally available for the majority of off-the-shelf unidirectional (4) Joint J33: three rows of bolts, three bolts per row.
pultruded composites. In fact, weaker bolts that are compatible (5) Joint J44: four rows of bolts, four bolts per row.
with the limited bearing strength of pultruded composites are pre-
ferred. The bearing failure stress is dependent on the compressive The joined elements consist of bi-directional multilayer sym-
strength of the composites. Thus, for a given bolt shear force (i.e., a metrical composites reinforced with glass fibers (GFRP). The vol-
given total cross-sectional area of bolts); the most effective strat- ume fractions of fibers and epoxy matrix are approximately
egy is to use several small diameter bolts, rather than fewer large equal to 65% and 35%, respectively.
diameter bolts, to generate a greater bearing area. The bolts used are of stainless steel class 8.8 and their diameter
When the joint presents more rows of bolts, it is possible to is equal to 14 mm. This value as well as the distances between the
define another failure mode called block shear [12]. This type of holes, the distances of the holes from the edge and the hole diam-
failure occurs with the detachment of a portion of the plate, caused eter, used for each of the previously mentioned configurations, cor-
by a combination of the normal stresses, acting perpendicularly to respond to the limit values suggested in the Technical Document
the cross section of the element connected, and the shear stresses, CNR-DT 205/2007 [3] issued by the Italian National Research Coun-
acting parallel to the direction of shear in the bolts. cil (CNR). In detail, the distance used between the holes is equal to
Cleavage failures are another form of low-strength joint failure 60 mm, the distance of the holes from the edge is respectively
resulting from the too close proximity of the end of the specimen. equal to 60 mm in the load direction and equal to 30 mm in the
In many cases, the cleavage failure is triggered by an incomplete direction orthogonal to the load.
net-section tension failure. This type of failure is usually initiated The joints are modelled by using eight-node orthotropic finite
at the joint end rather than adjacent to the bolt hole. This failure elements (bricks), while one-dimensional point-contact elements
mode is a combination of both tension and shear failure. The higher are used to simulate the contact between the bolt and the FRP
stresses initiating this failure mode are the result of three-point plates. The mechanical properties of the composites materials are
bending of the short beam beyond the bolt. The failure of this short reported in Table 1.
beam is aggravated, for a given bolt load, by an increase in the beam
length due to tensile failure of the net section through the bolt. In 4.1.1. Joints J11, J21 and J22
summary, cleavage failures can be avoided by selecting an appro- Joint J11 has two exterior composite square plates with a length
priate edge distance, and by optimizing the joined member equal to 60 mm and a thickness of 15 mm. The interior composite
laminate’s architecture, which should contain an adequate percent- plate has a length of 120 mm along the y axis, a width equal to
age of transverse 90° plies. 60 mm along the x axis and a thickness of 30 mm (Fig. 2a).
 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780 3775

Fig. 5. GFRP composite plate: (a) geometry (without washer); (b) finite element mesh of the plate (without washer); (c) geometry (with washer); (d) finite element mesh of
the plate (with washer).

Table 6 Table 7
Mechanical properties of the glass FRP. Mechanical properties of the steel bolt.

Modulus of Modulus of elasticity in Inplane shear Inplane Modulus of elasticity, E (MPa) Shear modulus, G (MPa) Poisson ratio, m
elasticity in the the direction transverse modulus, G12 Poisson
210000 80769 0.3
fibres direction, to the fibres, (MPa) ratio, m12
E1 (MPa) E2 (MPa)
25000 8500 3000 0.23 to 180 mm, a width equal to 60 mm and thickness equal to 15 mm,
while the interior composite plate has a length equal to 360 mm, a
width equal to 60 mm and a thickness equal to 30 mm (Fig. 2b).
The load applied loads and boundary conditions considered for this
At sections E, shown in Fig. 2a, of both external plates, a tensile joint were identical to those adopted for Joint J11. Fig. 3b shows
load is applied equal to 0.1 MPa, while the interior plate is fixed in the finite-element mesh for Joint J21.
Section I. Fig. 3a shows the finite-element mesh for Joint J11. Fig. 4b presents the normal stress distribution ryy at the inter-
The normal stress distribution ryy at the interface bolt-hole for face bolt-hole for each plate for Joint J21 for external and internal
each plate for Joint J11 is presented in Fig. 4a for external plates plates, respectively.
and for the internal one. The third Joint, J22, is characterized by two rows of bolts and
The second type of joint studied, J21, has two rows of bolts and two bolts per row, and has a length equal to 180 mm, a width equal
one bolt per row. The exterior composite plates have a length equal to 120 mm and a thickness equal to 15 mm for the exterior plates,
3776 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780
Fig. 6. Maximum bearing stresses: (a) pw = 7.2 MPa; (b) pw = 216 MPa.
while for the interior composite plate, the length is the same as for
Joint J21. The width of this joint is equal to 120 mm and its thick-
ness is equal to 30 mm, as shown in Fig. 2c. The load applied and
constraints considered are the same as for e Joint J11. Fig. 3c shows
the finite-element mesh for this joint.
Fig. 4c presents the normal stress distribution ryy at the inter-
face bolt-hole for each plate for Joint J22 for external and internal
plates, respectively.
The results generated from the analysis of the aforementioned
three bolted joints made it possible to optimize the finite element
meshes used subsequently for more complex configurations of
Joints J33 and J44.
4.1.2. Joints J33 and J44
Bolted composite Joint, J33, characterized by three rows of bolts
and three bolts per row, has a length equal to 240 mm, a width
equal to 180 mm and a thickness equal to 15 mm for the exterior
composite plates, while for the interior plate, the length is equal
to 480 mm, the width is equal to 180 mm and the thickness is
equal to 30 mm (Fig. 2d).
The load applied and boundary conditions for this joint were
identical to those adopted for Joint J11. Fig. 3d presents the fi-
nite-element mesh for Joint J33. The normal stress state ryy at
the interface bolt-hole for each plate is presented in Fig. 4d for
external plates and for the internal one. For this bolted joint, the
shear stress distribution coefficients for each bolt and each row
of bolts were determined and presented in Table 2. These coeffi-
cients are equal to 28% for central row 2 and 36% for the exterior
rows 1 and 3.
As shown in Fig. 4d, the stress distribution is symmetrical in
relation to the central row, with the external bolts (e) of each
row resulting attracting more loads as compared to the interior
bolts (i).
The last type of multi-bolted joint evaluated in this study was
Joint J44 with four rows of bolts and four bolts per row (Fig. 2e).
The exterior composite plates length for this joint is 300 mm, the
width equal to 240 mm and thickness equal to 15 mm. For this
joint configuration, the length of the interior plate has a different
length, equal to 600 mm, and a different thickness equal to
30 mm. The load applied and the boundary conditions of Joint
 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780 3777

Fig. 7. Maximum stresses at a distance of db/2 from the hole: (a) pw = 7.2 MPa; (b) pw = 216 MPa.

In this case, the shear stress distribution coefficients values are

Table 8
Bearing stresses for Joint J33: numerical versus experimental values. determined for each row and each bolt (Table 3). These coefficients
are equal to 31% for the external rows (row 1 and 4) and 19% for
Finite-element analysis (FEM) Experimental analysis (EXP)
the internal ones. Similar to Joint J33, the stress state of this joint
ryy (MPa) Hole ryy (MPa) Hole is symmetrical with the exterior bolts (e) of each row being more
0.1452 B1 0.1464 B1 loaded than the interior bolts (i) as shown in Fig. 4e.
0.1416 B2 0.1224 B2 The shear stress distribution coefficients values reported in Ta-
0.1452 B3 0.1536 B3 ble 4 are obtained from a finite element numerical analysis, while
0.1128 B4 0.1212 B4
0.1104 B5 0.1044 B5
the values suggested by the Technical Document CNR-DT 205/2007
0.1128 B6 0.1308 B6 [3] are reported in Table 5. It should be noted that these values are
0.1452 B7 0.1476 B7 normalized in respect to the resulting shear stress.
0.1416 B8 0.1212 B8 Comparing the numerical values presented in Table 4 with cor-
0.1452 B9 0.1524 B9
responding CNR-DT values in Table 5, it is possible to note that the
coefficients obtained for Joint J44 are very similar, while for Joint
J33, there are percentage differences respectively equal to 13.8%
for external rows and 55.5% for the internal one. Joints with a num-
ber of rows greater than four are not recommended.
J44 are identical to those for Joint J11. Fig. 3e presents the finite-
element mesh for Joint J44. 4.2. In presence of washers
Figs. 4e shows the normal stress distribution ryy around the six-
teen bolt holes of the plates, for external and internal plates, In order to simulate the pressure distribution at the bolt hole
respectively. due to the presence of the washers, a circular plate of GFRP is
3778 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780

Fig. 8. (a) Joint J33 instrumented and ready for testing. (b) Tekscan pressure sensors
in the holes.

Fig. 10. (a) bearing stresses: numerical versus experimental values (ryy); (b)
deformations: numerical versus experimental values (eyy).

240
Internal plate 60 60 60 60 External plates

15 15 15 30
15
S1 S4 S7
B1 B4 B7
60
15 15 15
F 15
F
S2 S5 S8
B2 B5 B8
60
15 15 15
15
S3 S6 S9
B3 B6 B9 30
ROW1

ROW2

ROW3

Internal plate
External plates
F/2
F
F/2
x

Fig. 9. Strain gauges layout (dimensions in mm).

 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780 3779

Table 9
Fig. 6a and 7a or Fig. 6b and 7b, the presence of washers deter-
Deformations for Joint J33: numerical versus experimental values.
mines, for low values of pw, a shift of the peak stress. This shift is
Finite-element analysis (FEM) Experimental analysis (EXP) almost equal to db/2 from the hole edge for each value of a. The
eyy Strain gauge eyy Strain gauge same shift occurs for high values of pw. However, in this case, there
5.46E 06 S1 7.09E 06 S1 is also a significant increase of the stress peak, which is almost
5.33E 06 S2 5.09E 06 S2 equal to five times higher (Fig. 7b) than the same one near the hole
5.46E 06 S3 6.58E 06 S3 edge. The presence of washers also influences the failure modes of
4.51E 06 S4 5.09E 06 S4 bolted joints. In fact, the most probable failure mode of this type of
4.42E 06 S5 2.55E 06 S5
4.51E 06 S6 4.71E 06 S6
joint is bearing failure when the presence of washers has little ef-
5.61E 06 S7 6.38E 06 S7 fect. However, in the presence of washers, the main failure mode
4.63E 06 S8 4.58E 06 S8 can be due to compression stresses r11 around the washer when
5.61E 06 S9 5.92E 06 S9 its diameter is equal to 1.5db or just under the washer when its
diameter is equal to 2db. For higher values of the diameter (2.5db,
3db, etc.), the compression stresses decrease and the failure can
Table 10 be due to compression or tensile stresses acting in a direction
Shear stress distribution coefficients for each bolt and each row of bolts obtained by transverse (r22) to fibre direction or due to shear stresses (s12).
analysis of experimental data for Joint J33.
Joint J33 Row 1 (%) Row 2 (%) Row 3 (%)
5. Experimental set-up and results of Joint J33
ROW1 ROW2 ROW3
e 12.2 10.1 12.3
e
i 10.2 8.7 10.1 An experimental investigation was conducted, on Joint J33, at
e 12.8 10.9 12.7 the Material and Structure Laboratory of the Department of Civil
i Engineering of the University of Salerno, in order to validate the
numerical results obtained in this study. The experimental pro-
e gram is going to test different types of GFRP bolted composite
joints, similar to those numerically analyzed and described earlier
Total 35.2 29.7 35.1 in this paper. Joint J33 was fabricated by vacuum lamination of 24
plies of bidirectional glass fibers and two plies of chopped strand
mat, impregnated with epoxy resin. The volume fractions of the fi-
bers and matrix are 65% and 35%, respectively. Fig. 8a shows the
analyzed using the same commercial software Straus7. A hole with typical test setup for GFRP bolted joints evaluated in this study.
a diameter d equal to 22 mm was considered at the centre of the The fibers of the specimen have an inclination a equal to 0°.
plate, as shown in Fig. 5a. The steel bolt has a diameter (db) equal The test has been performed using a calibrated universal ma-
to 20 mm, thus the plate diameter is equal to 4db [24–26]. On the chine SCHENCK Hydropuls S56. This testing machine consists of
bolt, there is an edge horizontal pressure q that corresponds to a an hydraulic piston with a loading capacity of ±630 kN, stroke of
resulting of 1 N. ±125 mm and a self-balanced steel frame used to counteract the
The mechanical properties of the GFRP plate and steel bolt are axial loadings. The machine operates under both displacement
presented in Tables 6 and 7, respectively. and load control protocols. In order to measure displacements,
For this finite-element model (Fig. 5b), the influence of variable the testing machine is equipped with an LVDT, while the tension/
diameter washers (Dw = 30, 40, 50 mm) on the failure modes of the compression loads are controlled by means of a calibrated elec-
plate was considered. In particular, the effect of the washers on the tronic load cell. The experimental data were collected using a com-
bearing stresses around the hole was also considered. In this case, puterized data acquisition system with three System 5100 Vishay
the laminate fibre orientations and the washer pressure (pw) are MM switchboards connected in parallel with 60 extensometric
varied. The washer pressure values evaluated in this study ranged channels and a Tekscan pressure mapping system, as shown in
from a lower value of 7.2 MPa that corresponds to finger-tight case, Fig. 8b, with 18 flexible sensors GRIP™ 4255 N, inserted in the bolt
to 216 MPa washer pressure as shown in Fig. 5c and d. Eight differ- holes (B1-B9), in order to measure the bearing stresses. The joint
ent laminate fibre orientations a were evaluated numerically, has been instrumented by using nine rectangular self temperature
namely; 0°, 5°, 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 75° and 90°. compensated strain gauges (S1-S9), C2A-06.062LR-120 Vishay
In this analysis, the contact surface between the hole and bolt, MM, bonded on one side of the specimen as shown in Fig. 8b.
as well as between the washer and the plate, is modelled through The strain gauges were placed at a distance, from the holes, equal
a point-contact element, with the friction factor, l, being equal to to 15 mm (Fig. 9). Table 8 and Fig. 10a summarized the numerical
0.07. values of bearing stresses ryy at load level of 540 N. They have been
The finite element analysis is carried out by applying an edge compared with those of the experimental analysis, for each hole.
compression pressure to the steel bolt in order to evaluate the Moreover in Table 9 and in Fig. 10b, local deformations for finite-
bearing stress acting around the hole. In Fig. 6a and b, the maxi- element and experimental analysis (S), respectively, were shown.
mum bearing stresses are illustrated. These figures show that these For this bolted joint, the shear stress distribution coefficients for
stress distributions r11 (acting along fibre direction) varying fibre each bolt and each row of bolts were determined and presented in
inclination, are almost all decreasing for each value of pw. In partic- Table 10. These coefficients are equal to 35.2%, 29.7% and 35.1%, for
ular, the effects of the presence of washers are more evident for row 1, for row 2 and for row 3, respectively.
higher values of pw than for lower values. The bearing stresses
r11 show, for each value of a, a minimum value for 6. Conclusions
Dw = 2db = 40 mm (optimal washer diameter).
The presence of the washers resulted in lowering the bearing In multi-bolt joints, the load is not distributed equally due to
stresses. However, the stresses acting in the fibre direction increase varying bolt position, bolt–hole clearance, bolt-torque or tighten-
at a distance equal to db/2 from the hole edge, for the same value of ing of the bolt, friction between member plates and washer-plate
optimal washer diameter as shown in Fig. 7a and b. Comparing interface. The shear stress distribution coefficients for each bolt
3780 L. Feo et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 3769–3780
and each row of bolts, in case of bolted Joint J33, are equal to 28%
for central row, and 36% for the external, rows, in the numerical
study. For bolted Joint J44, the shear stress distribution coefficients
are equal to 31% for external rows and 19% for internal ones. Com-
paring these results with percentage values suggested in CNR-DT
205 [3] (Table 5), for Joint J44, the coefficients are almost coinci-
dent, while for Joint J33 there are differences equal to 13.8% for
external rows and 55.5% for internal one. For this joint, percentage
differences are less evident comparing coefficients obtained in fi-
nite-element analysis (Table 2) and experimental analysis (Table
10). In fact, there is a maximum percentage difference of 2.6% for
external rows and 6.1% for the internal one.
In the presence of washers, stress distributions (r11-fibre direc-
tion), varying fibre inclination, are almost all decreasing for each
value of pw. In particular, the effects of the presence of washers
are more evident for high values of pw than for low values. In fact,
the main effect is that the bearing stresses r11 show, for each value
of a, a minimum value for Dw = 2db (optimal washer diameter)
[35].
References
[1] Mosallam AS. Chapter on composites in construction. Materials selection
handbook. John Wiley Publishing Co; 2002 [chapter 45].
[2] Eurocomp Designe Code and Handbook. Structural design of polymer
composites. The European Structural Polymeric Composites Group. 1996
ISBN 0419194509.
[3] Technical Document CNR-DT 205/2007. Guide for the Design and Construction
of Structures made of FRP Pultruded Elements. Italian National Research
Council (CNR) Rome; 2008.
[4] Mosallam AS, Abdel Hamid MK, Conway J. Performance of pultruded FRP
connections under static and dynamic loads. J Reinf Plast Compos 1993;13:
386–407.
[5] ASTM International. MIL 17 Handbook: The composite materials handbook;
2002.
[6] Rosner C. Single-bolted connections for orthotropic fiber-reinforced composite
structural members. Master’s thesis; 1992.
[7] Hassan NK. Evaluation of multi-bolted connections for GFRP members. Ph.D.
dissertation; 1994.
[8] Prabhakaran R, Devara S, Razzaq Z. The effect of fiber orientation angle on the
unnotched, open hole, and pin-loaded strength of a pultruded composite. In:
Proc. 51st Annual Conf. of the Composites Inst., Society of the Plastics Industry,
Washington DC; 1996. p. 1–15.
[9] Turvey GJ. Single-bolt tension joint tests on pultruded GRP plate: effects of
tension direction relative to pultrusion direction. Compos Struct 1998;42(4):
341–51.
[10] Yuan RL, Liu CJ. Experimental characterization of FRP mechanical connections.
In: Proc. 3rd Inter Conf. on advanced composite materials in bridges and
structures. The Canadian Society for Civil Engineers; 2000. p. 103–10.
[11] Starikov R, Schön J. Quasi-static behaviour of composite joints with
protruding-head bolts. Compos Struct 2001;51:411–25.
[12] Prabhakaran R, Devara S. Load and resistance factor design (LRFD) approach
for bolted joints in pultruded composites. Composites: Part B 1996;27B:
351–60.
[13] Persson E, Eriksson I. Fatigue of multiple-row bolted joints in carbon/epoxy
laminates: ranking of factors affecting strength and fatigue life. Int J Fatigue
1999;21:337–53.
[14] Mosallam AS. Design guide for FRP composite connections, manuals of practice
(MOP) 102. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE); 2011.
ISBN9780784406120: 624.
[15] Lawlor VP, McCarthy MA, Stanley WF. An experimental study of bolt–hole
clearance effects in double-lap, multi-bolt composite joints. Compos Struct
2005;71:176–90.
[16] Hassan NK, Mohamedien MA, Rizkalla SH. Finite element analysis of bolted
connections for PFRP composites. Compos Part B: Eng 1996;27(3–4):339–49.
[17] Camanho PP, Matthews FL. Stress analysis and strength prediction of
mechanically fastened joints in FRP: a review. Compos Part A: Appl Sci
Manuf 1997;28(6):529–47.
[18] Ekh J, Schön J. Load transfer in multirow, single shear, composite-to-
aluminium lap joints. Compos Sci Technol 2006;66:875–85.
[19] Starikov R, Schön J. Experimental study on fatigue resistance of composite
joints with protruding-head bolts. Compos Struct 2002;55:1–11.
[20] Xiao Y, Ishikawa T. Bearing strength and failure behaviour of bolted composite
joints (part II: modelling and simulation). Compos Sci Technol: Eng
2005;65:1032–43.
[21] Kelly G, Hallström S. Bearing strength of carbon fibre/epoxy laminates: effects
of bolt-hole clearance. Compos Part B: Eng 2004;35:331–43.
[22] Vangrimde B, Boukhili R. Descriptive relationships between bearing response
and macroscopic damage in GFRP bolted joints. Compos Part B: Eng
2003;34(8):593–605.
[23] Ireman T. Three-dimensional stress analysis of bolted single-lap composite
joints. Compos Struct 1998;43:195–216.
[24] Ascione F, Feo L, Maceri F. An experimental investigation on the bearing failure
load of glass fibre/epoxy laminates. Compos Part B: Eng 2009;40(3):197–205.
[25] Gray PJ, McCarthy CT. A global bolted joint model for finite element analysis of
load distributions in multi-bolt composite joints. Compos Part B: Eng
2010;41(4):317–25.
[26] Ascione F, Feo L, Maceri F. On the pin-bearing failure load of GFRP bolted
laminates: an experimental analysis on the influence of bolt diameter. Compos
Part B: Eng 2010;41(6):482–90.
[27] Ascione F, Cerenza V, Feo L, Marra G. Stress analysis of bolted joints between
FRP pultruded profiles. ICCE-17, Honolulu, USA; 2009.
[28] Ozen M, Sayman O. Failure loads of mechanical fastened pinned and bolted
composite joints with two serial holes. Compos Part B: Eng 2011;42(2):
264–74.
[29] Pisano AA, Fuschi P. Mechanically fastened joints in composite laminates:
evaluation of load bearing capacity. Compos Part B: Eng 2011;42(4):946–61.
[30] Feo L, Marra M, Penna R. A numerical analysis on the pin-bearing failure of
glass fibre reinforced polymer laminates. ICCE-18, Ankorage, Alaska, USA;
2010.
[31] Ascione F. A preliminary numerical and experimental investigation on the
shear stress distribution on multi-row bolted FRP joints. Mech Res Commun
2010;37(2):164–8.
[32] Olmedo A, Santiuste C. On the prediction of bolted single-lap composite joints.
Compos Struct 2012;94(6):2110–7.
[33] Duc Hai N, Mutsuyoshi H. Structural behavior of double-lap joints of steel
splice plates bolted/bonded to pultruded hybrid CFRP/GFRP laminates. Constr
Build Mater 2012;30:347–59.
[34] Barut A, Madenci E. Analysis of bolted–bonded composite single-lap joints
under combined in-plane and transverse loading. Compos Struct 2009;88(4):
579–94.
[35] Marra G, PhD Thesis, A numerical and experimental analysis on the
mechanical behavior of bolted joints between pultruded and T-Stubs of glass
fibre-reinforced polymer; 2012.