applied

sciences
Article
Shear Strengths of Different Bolt Connectors on the
Large Span of Aluminium Alloy Honeycomb
Sandwich Structure
Caiqi Zhao *, Weidong Zheng, Jun Ma and Yangjian Zhao
Key Laboratory of Concrete and Prestressed Concrete Structure, Ministry of Education,
School of Civil Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China;
zwdlyj@163.com (W.Z.); majunmajunb@163.com (J.M.); zyj66720200@163.com (Y.Z.)
* Correspondence: 101000815@seu.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-25-8620-5622

Academic Editor: Stefano Invernizzi

Received: 19 January 2017; Accepted: 24 April 2017; Published: 27 April 2017

Abstract: This study investigates the shear capacity of aluminum alloy honeycomb sandwich plates
connected by high-strength, ordinary, or self-tapping bolts. For that purpose, experimental tests and
finite elements are carried out. The failure of a high-strength bolt connector is driven by bending
deformations developed in the bolt that deform connection plate and pad openings. In the case
of ordinary bolt connectors, stress concentration on the bolt shear surface causes a large shear
deformation that finally leads to failure. In the case of self-tapping bolt connectors, the insufficient
mechanical bite force of the screw thread yields the bolt misalignment and concentrates shear
deformation. As a result, the high-strength bolt connector is the most efficient design solution.
If the bolt hole edge distance is more than 1.5 times as much as the bolt diameter, the connection
performance becomes insensitive to this parameter. The practical formula for evaluating the connector
shear capacity is derived from experimental data.

Keywords: honeycomb sandwich structure; large-span Vierendeel roof; connection performance;

hole wall pressure bearing; shear resistance

1. Introduction
A honeycomb sandwich structure is a typical lightweight and high-strength biomimetic
structure [1–4]. Based on the characteristics of a lightweight beetle forewing structure [5,6], Chen et al.
developed an integrated biomimetic honeycomb sandwich structure [7,8], which has advantages such
as cementing free, single cast forming and excellent mechanical properties [6,9]. Currently, this plate is
composed of reinforced basalt fibre epoxy resin composite material; the thickness of the honeycomb
wall is approximately 2 mm [10]. By comparison, the thickness of the honeycomb core wall of the
aluminium alloy honeycomb sandwich structure is approximately 0.05 mm, which is approximately
1/40 of the former. The latter is more suitable for a large span spatial structure, which is especially
sensitive to dead weight [11–13]. Therefore, this paper proposes a spatial assembly of an aluminium
alloy honeycomb sandwich structure via a special connector to form a skeleton-free prefabricated large
span Vierendeel roof system (referred to as a “honeycomb sandwich structure system” (HSSS)) [14].
This new spatial structure has characteristics such as a large span, light dead weight, high total rigidity,
and low total cost and can be extensively deployed in various large span spatial roof structures, such as
stadiums with various spans, airplane hangars and single-layer industrial plants (Figure 1).

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450; doi:10.3390/app7050450 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 2 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 2 of 11

Typical large-span
Figure 1. Typical large-span Vierendeel
Vierendeel roof
roof system
system structures
structures composed
composed of
of aa honeycomb
honeycomb sandwich
sandwich
gabled frame.
structure: (a) plane; (b) curved surface; (c) gabled frame.

Initial investigations
Initial investigations on onthisthisnewnewstructural
structuralsystemsystem showed
showed that that[15,16] thethe
[15,16] failure
failuremode modeof this
of
prefabricated structure primarily takes the following form: (1) lateral
this prefabricated structure primarily takes the following form: (1) lateral pressure buckling failure pressure buckling failure on the
internal
on surface surface
the internal of the honeycomb
of the honeycomb sandwichsandwichstructurestructure
(Figure 2b, arrows)
(Figure 2b,and (2) plate
arrows) andconnector
(2) plate
damage failure (Figure 2c, arrows). As internal force is transmitted
connector damage failure (Figure 2c, arrows). As internal force is transmitted among the honeycomb among the honeycomb sandwich
structures via
sandwich a connector,
structures via athe connectorthe
connector, reliability
connector determines
reliability thedetermines
total stress-bearing
the totalcapacity of this
stress-bearing
new structure system and has direct impact on its adoption
capacity of this new structure system and has direct impact on its adoption and deployment in and deployment in an actual project.
Therefore,
an properly
actual project. simulating
Therefore, properlyconnection
simulating performance
connectionamong honeycomb
performance amongsandwich
honeycomb structures
sandwich is
critical to aisnew
structures structure’s
critical to a newreliability
structure’s analysis and analysis
reliability design. Similar
and design.to theSimilar
lateral pressure
to the lateral performance
pressure
that was investigated in a previous study [17], the connection performance
performance that was investigated in a previous study [17], the connection performance of a honeycomb of a honeycomb sandwich
structure connector
sandwich structure is an important
connector is an technical
importantissue that should
technical issue thatbe solved
shouldforbethissolvedtype forof structure.
this type
The
of connection
structure. Theofconnection
mechanicalofproperties—such as failure mode
mechanical properties—such asand
failureultimate
modebearing capacity—of
and ultimate bearinga
connector with different connection methods are aspects of this performance.
capacity—of a connector with different connection methods are aspects of this performance. Previously, Previously, McCarthy
[18] has conducted
McCarthy a series of
[18] has conducted studies
a series on the bolts
of studies on theand boltsbolt-hole
and bolt-holeclearance. TheyThey
clearance. havehave analyzed
analyzedthe
impact of bolt-hole clearance on the load distribution and the extruding
the impact of bolt-hole clearance on the load distribution and the extruding strength, which provided strength, which provided
guidance for
guidance forthethespecimen
specimendesign design in in
thisthis paper.
paper. Matthews
Matthews [19][19] has investigated
has investigated the single
the single bolt and boltmulti
and
multi bolts by experiments, from which they have found that the
bolts by experiments, from which they have found that the individual bolt will bear less load when the individual bolt will bear less load
whenisthe
joint more joint is moreThus,
complex. complex. Thus, bolt
the single the single
is adoptedbolt isinadopted
experiment in experiment
to guarantee tothat
guarantee that the
the connection
connection
fails fails first.
first. Whitney andWhitney
Nuismerand used the [20]
[20]Nuismer used the length
characteristic characteristic
methodlength method
to calculate theto calculate
connection
the connection strength. Chang [21] developed the characteristic
strength. Chang [21] developed the characteristic length method to make it widely used in composite length method to make it widely
used in composite
laminates structures.laminates
However,structures.
the existingHowever,
literature the lacksexisting
the studiesliterature
of the lacks the studies
connection of the
performance
connection performance of honeycomb sandwich structures,
of honeycomb sandwich structures, and the effect of sandwich wall thickness on the load bearing and the effect of sandwich wall
thicknesshas
capacity on notthe been
load considered
bearing capacity has notInbeen
sufficiently. order considered
to investigate sufficiently. In order
the connection to investigate
performance of
the connection
honeycomb performance
sandwich structures of that
honeycomb
are connected sandwich structures
via different that are
methods, thisconnected
paper hasvia different
investigated
methods,
the failurethis mode paper
andhas investigated
connection the failure
performance mode and connection
of aluminium alloy honeycomb performance
sandwich of aluminium
structures
alloyare
that honeycomb
connected sandwich structures
via three different that are
methods, connected
including via three different
a high-strength methods,ordinary
bolt, a low-cost including bolta
high-strength bolt, a low-cost ordinary bolt and a convenient self-tapping
and a convenient self-tapping bolt. The connector’s bolt hole edge distance is optimized to reduce bolt. The connector’s bolt
hole edge distance is optimized to reduce the connection plate dimensions
the connection plate dimensions and material consumption. Finite element analysis on the connector and material consumption.
Finite element
ultimate bearinganalysis
capacityon the connector
is performed ultimate bearing
for honeycomb sandwich capacity is performed
structures with various for honeycomb
thicknesses
sandwich structures with various thicknesses and bolt diameters
and bolt diameters to obtain a simplified formula for connector ultimate bearing capacity calculations to obtain a simplified formula for
connector
for various ultimate bearing
failure modes via capacity
fitting. This calculations for various
formula provides failure modes
a theoretical basis forviathefitting. This formula
engineering design
provides
and a theoretical
application of a new basis for the engineering
honeycomb sandwichdesign structure andsystem.
application of a new honeycomb sandwich
structure system.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 3 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 3 of 11

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 3 of 11

Figure
Figure 2. Concatenation
2. Concatenation test
test forfora ahoneycomb
honeycomb sandwich
sandwich structure
structuresystem: (a) (a)
system: Loading
Loadingsite; site;
(b) Buckled
(b) Buckled
shape of internal surface of the sandwich box; (c) Partially enlarged diagram of the
shape of internal surface of the sandwich box; (c) Partially enlarged diagram of the lateral lateral side side
of theof the
box specimen: bolt is cut off.
box specimen: bolt is cut off.
Figure 2. Concatenation test for a honeycomb sandwich structure system: (a) Loading site; (b) Buckled
shape of internal surface of the sandwich box; (c) Partially enlarged diagram of the lateral side of the
2. Experimental Tests and Finite Element Simulations of Connector Performance
2. box specimen:
Experimental Testsbolt
and is cut off. Element Simulations of Connector Performance
Finite
2.1. Experimental Tests
2. Experimental
2.1. Experimental Tests and Finite Element Simulations of Connector Performance
Tests
As current Chinese specifications have no detailed requirements for a connection performance
2.1. current
As
test Experimental
for a honeycomb Testssandwich
Chinese specifications have
structure, theno detailedinrequirements
specimen for a connection
this paper is designed and tested based performance
on
theaconnection
test for honeycomb test procedure in “Technical Specification for High Strength
As current Chinese specifications have no detailed requirements for a connection performance on
sandwich structure, the specimen in this paper is Bolt
designedConnections
and testedof Steel
based
Structures
the connection [22]”
test for a honeycomb and “The
test procedure Generals
sandwich of Test
in “Technical
structure, Method
Specification
the specimen for in
Properties
for paperofStrength
this High isAdhesive-bonded
designed Bolt Aluminium
andConnections
tested based on of Steel
Honeycomb-Sandwich
Structures [22]” and
the connection test“The Structure
Generals
procedure and Core [23]”.
of Test Method
in “Technical for Properties
Specification of Adhesive-bonded
for High Strength Bolt Connections Aluminium
of Steel
The planar
Structures [22]”dimensions
and Structure of a concatenated
“The Generals of Test[23]”.honeycomb
Method sandwich of
for Properties specimen are shown in
Adhesive-bonded Figure 3a.
Aluminium
Honeycomb-Sandwich and Core
The plate thickness
Honeycomb-Sandwich has three specifications:
Structure 10,
and Core [23]”. 15, and 20 mm. The thicknesses of the top and bottom
The planar dimensions of a concatenated honeycomb sandwich specimen are shown in Figure 3a.
platesTheareplanar
1 mm.dimensions
The lengthof and thickness
a concatenated of a regular hexagon honeycomb core’s side is 6 mm and
The plate
0.05
thickness
mm,
has three
respectively. The
specifications:
connectors include
10,ahoneycomb
15, and 20sandwich
high-strength
mm. The
bolt, an
specimen
ordinary
are shown
thicknesses
bolt,
of
and
thea
intop
Figure
and3a.
self-tapping
bottom
The plate thickness has three specifications: 10, 15, and 20 mm. The thicknesses of the top and bottom
platesbolt.
are 1 mm. The length are and thickness of a regular hexagon honeycomb Ascore’s side isof6 this
mm and
platesThree
are 1 specimens
mm. The length made
and for each group
thickness with a hexagon
of a regular total of 27honeycomb
specimens. core’stheside
purpose
is 6 mm and
0.05 mm,
study respectively.
is to investigate Thea connectorsfailure
connector’s include modea high-strength
and failure bolt, an ordinary
mechanism [24–28], bolt,
the and a self-tapping
connector failure
0.05 mm, respectively. The connectors include a high-strength bolt, an ordinary bolt, and a self-tapping
bolt. prior
Three
bolt. tospecimens
Threethespecimens areare
plate material made for
failure
made for each
eachgroup
(connected
group with
with aashould
matrix) totalofof
total be2727 specimens.
avoided.
specimens. As As
the the
Therefore, each
purposepurpose
sideofonly of this
this
contains
studystudy a single
is to isinvestigate bolt
to investigate connection.
a connector’s The
a connector’sfailure test
failuremodeis based
mode and on
andfailurea displacement
failuremechanism
mechanism load method,
[24–28],
[24–28], which
the connector
the connector evenly
failurefailure
priorapplies
to the
prior totension
plate
the plate to amaterial
materialspecimen according
failure
failure(connectedto a specified
(connected matrix) load
matrix) should
should pattern at a continuous
bebeavoided.
avoided. rateeach
Therefore,
Therefore, of 1each
mm/min
side side
only only
until
contains afailure
contains single occurs.
boltbolt
a single As aluminium
connection.
connection. The honeycomb
The test
test is
is basedcore
based onmaterial
on is relatively
aadisplacement
displacement soft,
load
load internal
method,
method, which pads
which are
evenly evenly
attached
applies at
tension both ends to prevent the honeycomb core at both clamps from being flattened during
applies tension to atospecimen
a specimen accordingtotoaaspecified
according specified load
loadpattern
patternatata continuous
a continuous raterate
of 1of mm/min
1 mm/min
loading and atoccurs.
the bolt connection point to avoid local pressure failure when asoft,
specimen is prepared.
until until
failurefailure
occurs. AsAs aluminium
aluminium honeycomb
honeycomb core
corematerial
materialis isrelatively
relatively internal
soft, internalpadspadsare are
attached at both ends to prevent the honeycomb core at both clamps
attached at both ends to prevent the honeycomb core at both clamps from being flattened during from being flattened during
loading and at the bolt connection point to avoid local pressure failure when a specimen is prepared.
loading and at the bolt connection point to avoid local pressure failure when a specimen is prepared.

Figure 3. Honeycomb sandwich specimens and connectors: (a) Specimen dimension and finite
element model; (b) Self-tapping bolt; (c) Ordinary bolt; (d) High-strength bolt.

Figure
Figure 3. Honeycomb
3. Honeycomb sandwich
sandwich specimens
specimens and and connectors:
connectors: (a) Specimen
(a) Specimen dimension
dimension andand finite
finite element
element
model; model; (b) Self-tapping
(b) Self-tapping bolt; (c) Ordinary
bolt; (c) Ordinary bolt; (d) High-strength
bolt; (d) High-strength bolt. bolt.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 4 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 4 of 11

2.2. Finite Element Modeling and Analysis

2.2. Finite
ANSYS Element Modeling
software and Analysis
is employed to create a corresponding honeycomb sandwich structure
connector finite element model for the
ANSYS software is employed to createpreviously mentioned
a corresponding test specimen
honeycomb [29,30].
sandwich The honeycomb
structure connector
sandwich structure material properties are as follows: elastic modulus E = 70.0
finite element model for the previously mentioned test specimen [29,30]. The honeycombGPa, shearsandwich
modulus
structure material
G = 27.0 GPa, yield stress σare
properties as follows:
0.2 =115.0 MPa,elastic modulusstress
and ultimate σb GPa,
E = 70.0 = 165.0shear FigureG4 =shows
modulus
MPa. 27.0 GPa,
the
yield stressconstitutive
simplified σ0.2 =115.0relationships
MPa, and ultimate
assumedstress = 165.0
σb part
for each MPa.
of the Figure
modeled 4 showsThe
specimen. thehoneycomb
simplified
constitutive
core is modeledrelationships
with shellassumed
elementsfor eachfacesheets
while part of the
aremodeled
modeledspecimen.
with solidThe honeycomb
elements core
[31–33]; is
core
modeled with shell
and facesheets elements by
are connected while facesheets
contact elements are[34,35].
modeled As with solid elements
the model [31–33];
has symmetric core and
geometrical
facesheets are connected by contact elements [34,35]. As the model has symmetric
dimensions, boundary constraint, and load, the analysis is based on a semi-structure, unidirectional, geometrical
dimensions,
and uniformboundary constraint,
displacement load is and load,tothe
applied theanalysis is based
end surface on ahoneycomb
of the semi-structure, unidirectional,
sandwich structure
and uniform
at the slip end.displacement load is applied to the end surface of the honeycomb sandwich structure at
the slip end.

σ(MPa) (a) σ(MPa) (b) σ(MPa) (c) σ(MPa) (d)

165 400 640 320

115
235

ε ε ε ε
0.001643 0.008073 0.00114 0.30 0.0031 0.00155

Figure 4. Material constitutive relation: (a) Aluminium alloy honeycomb sandwich structure;
Figure 4. Material constitutive relation: (a) Aluminium alloy honeycomb sandwich structure;
(b) Connection plate; (c) High strength bolt; (d) Ordinary bolt and self-tapping bolt.
(b) Connection plate; (c) High strength bolt; (d) Ordinary bolt and self-tapping bolt.

The results
results of
ofprevious
previousresearch
researchonona anew newhoneycomb
honeycomb sandwich
sandwich structure indicate
structure thatthat
indicate [16,17] the
[16,17]
connector material
the connector accounts
material for more
accounts for than
more10%thanof this
10%typeof of structure
this type ofmaterial.
structureHence, minimizing
material. Hence,
the dimensions
minimizing the of the connecting
dimensions of theplate has a high
connecting plateeconomical
has a highvalue. However,
economical thisHowever,
value. dimension is
this
normally
dimensionconstrained
is normallyby the bolt hole
constrained edge
by the distance.
bolt hole edge In distance.
this paper,In the
thisconnector
paper, themodel, which
connector has
model,
dimensions that are identical
which has dimensions to the
that are dimensions
identical to theof the specimen,
dimensions is created.
of the specimen,Theisbolt hole edge
created. The distances
bolt hole
are
edgesetdistances
to 2.0, 1.5,
are1.0,
setand 0.7d1.5,
to 2.0, 0 (d is
1.0,
0 the
and bolt
0.7dhole
0 (d 0 diameter).
is the bolt The
hole dimensions
diameter). of
The the corresponding
dimensions of the
connection plate and pad are modified to perform a finite element analysis for
corresponding connection plate and pad are modified to perform a finite element analysis for the the connector ultimate
bearing
connector capacity.
ultimate bearing capacity.

3. Results and
3. Results and Discussion
Discussion

3.1. Analysis of Connector Failure Modes

3.1. Analysis of Connector Failure Modes
Figure 5 shows the different failure modes observed for the connector in the experimental tests.
Figure 5 shows the different failure modes observed for the connector in the experimental tests.
The specimen has no distinct deformation under a relatively small tensile load. As the load gradually
The specimen has no distinct deformation under a relatively small tensile load. As the load gradually
increases,
increases, the
the bolt
bolt will
will develop
develop bending
bending deformation.
deformation. This This process
process is is accompanied
accompanied by by aa distinct
distinct
sound, which indicates that the honeycomb core is under pressure from
sound, which indicates that the honeycomb core is under pressure from facesheets and becomes facesheets and becomes
partially
partially flattened
flattened when
when the
the connector
connector bears
bears shear
shear force
force (Figure
(Figure 5d).
5d). When
When the
the load exceeds the
load exceeds bolt’s
the bolt’s
ultimate shear capacity, the bolt is cut off (Figure 5b,e) and a muffled sound is heard.
ultimate shear capacity, the bolt is cut off (Figure 5b,e) and a muffled sound is heard. The bolt hole The bolt hole in
ainhoneycomb
a honeycomb sandwich structure
sandwich is alsoisstretched
structure to an oval
also stretched shape
to an ovalunder
shapepressure, and the connector
under pressure, and the
is
connector is damaged. As the high-strength bolt has a relatively high shear capacity,failure
damaged. As the high-strength bolt has a relatively high shear capacity, local tensile of the
local tensile
honeycomb sandwich structure occurs before some connectors reach their ultimate
failure of the honeycomb sandwich structure occurs before some connectors reach their ultimate shear capacities.
This
shearfailure causes
capacities. thefailure
This honeycombcausessandwich structure
the honeycomb to tear atstructure
sandwich the pad;tohowever, thepad;
tear at the bolt however,
is not cut
off (Figure 5c).
the bolt is not cut off (Figure 5c).
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 5 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 5 of 11

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 5 of 11

Figure 5. Specimen failure process; (a–c) High strength bolt connector; (d,e) Ordinary bolt connector;
Figure 5. Specimen failure process; (a–c) High strength bolt connector; (d,e) Ordinary bolt connector;
(f,g) Self-tapping bolt connector.
(f,g) Self-tapping bolt connector.
Figure 6 shows the deformation and stress from the finite element analysis for the connector
Figure 5. Specimen failure process; (a–c) High strength bolt connector; (d,e) Ordinary bolt connector;
failure. As
Figure shown the
6 shows in Figure 6a,b, the and
deformation total stress
stress on the the
from honeycomb sandwich
finite element structure
analysis foris the
relatively
connector
(f,g) Self-tapping bolt connector.
high;
failure. Asthe honeycomb
shown in Figure core 6a,b,
and the
thehoneycomb
total stressfacesheets, pad, and connection
on the honeycomb sandwich plate have relatively
structure is relatively
high;small displacements;
theFigure
honeycomb 6 shows coretheand
the displacement
the honeycomb
deformation at the
and opening
stress fromsuddenly
facesheets, pad,increases;
the finite and the
connection
element bolt develops
analysis plate
for thehave bending
relatively
connector
deformation under load. The total stress on the honeycomb sandwich structure is primarily less than
smallfailure. As shown the
displacements; in Figure 6a,b, the total
displacement at the stress
openingon thesuddenly
honeycomb sandwich
increases; thestructure is relatively
bolt develops bending
260 MPa. However,
high; the honeycomb severe stress concentration occurs at the contact points among the opening, bolt,
deformation under load.core Theand the honeycomb
total stress on the facesheets,
honeycomb pad, and connection
sandwich plate have
structure relatively
is primarily less
and connection
small displacements;plate.the displacement at the opening suddenly increases; the bolt develops bending
than 260 MPa. However,
Figure 6c,d show
severe stress and
displacement
concentration
stress
occurs at
distributionssandwich
the contact
of the bolt
points among
and connection plate
the opening,
inthan
the
bolt, deformation
and
entityconnection
model
under
for
load.
plate.
the
The total stress
honeycomb sandwich
on the honeycomb
structure connector. The
structure
bolt
is primarily
develops tiny
less
bending
260 MPa. However, severe stress concentration occurs at the contact points among the opening, bolt,
Figure 6c,d show
deformation and displacement
rigid rotation; theand stress distributions
displacement in the central of part
the bolt
of theand connection
bolt is relatively plate
largein the
and connection plate.
entity(Figure
model for
6c). A the
stresshoneycomb
concentration sandwich
occurs at structure
the contact connector.
point with The
the pad,
Figure 6c,d show displacement and stress distributions of the bolt and connection plate in the
bolt
the develops
maximum tiny
stressbending
is
780 MPa,and
deformation the rigid
working stress exceeds
rotation; the 22% of the in
displacement ultimate
the strength—in
central part of order
the to intuitively
bolt is relatively and large
entity model for the honeycomb sandwich structure connector. The bolt develops tiny bending
(Figureprecisely
6c). Afind the concentration
stress failure position occurs
of highat strength
the contactbolt, we intentionally did not setmaximum
it in the finite
deformation and rigid rotation; the displacement in the point
centralwith
part the pad,
of the boltthe is relatively large stress is
element
780 MPa, analysis,
the6c).
working and observed
stress the
exceeds 22% stress concentration
of the ultimate degree—and material yield occurs. The bolt
(Figure A stress concentration occurs at the contactstrength—in
point with the order
pad,to intuitively
the maximumand precisely
stress is
develops bending deformation and exerts pressure on the connection plate, and the stress in this area
find 780
the MPa,
failuretheposition
workingofstress high exceeds
strength22% bolt, of wethe intentionally did not order
ultimate strength—in set it to in intuitively
the finite element
and
is relatively high. The total connection plate displacement is relatively small, and the bolt hole
precisely
analysis, and find the failure
observed position
the stress of high strength
concentration bolt, we intentionally
degree—and material yield didoccurs.
not set The it inbolt
the finite
develops
develops significant deformation. A stress concentration occurs at the honeycomb sandwich
element
bending analysis, and
deformation and observed
exerts the stress
pressure on concentration
the connection degree—and
plate, and material
the yield
stress in occurs.
this area The
is bolt
relatively
structure’s contact point with the connection plate, and the maximum stress is 270 MPa. The stress
develops
high.around
The total bending deformation and exerts pressure on the connection plate, and the stress in this area
theconnection plate displacement
bolt hole exceeds the material yield is relatively small,
stress, which and the
causes bolt hole develops
the surrounding yieldingsignificant
bolt
is relatively high. The total connection plate displacement is relatively small, and the bolt hole
deformation. A stress
hole to become concentration
stretched occurs
into an oval shape at(Figure
the honeycomb
6d). sandwich structure’s contact point with
develops significant deformation. A stress concentration occurs at the honeycomb sandwich
the connection plate, and the maximum stress is 270 MPa. The stress around the bolt hole exceeds the
structure’s contact point with the connection plate, and the maximum stress is 270 MPa. The stress
material yield stress, which causes the surrounding yielding bolt hole to become stretched into an oval
around the bolt hole exceeds the material yield stress, which causes the surrounding yielding bolt
shape (Figure
hole to become6d). stretched into an oval shape (Figure 6d).

Figure 6. Results of FE simulations: (a,b) displacement field and stress distribution for the sandwich
structure; (c) displacement field and stress distribution for the high-strength bolt; (d) displacement
field and stress distribution for the connection plate. Displacements are expressed in mm and stress
in MPa.
Figure 6. Results
Figure of FE
6. Results simulations:
of FE simulations:(a,b)
(a,b)displacement fieldand
displacement field andstress
stress distribution
distribution for for
the the sandwich
sandwich
structure; (c) displacement
structure; fieldfield
(c) displacement andand
stress distribution
stress forfor
distribution thethe
high-strength
high-strengthbolt;
bolt;(d)
(d)displacement
displacement field
and stress distribution
field and for the connection
stress distribution plate. Displacements
for the connection are expressed
plate. Displacements in mm
are expressed in and stress
mm and in MPa.
stress
in MPa.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 6 of 11

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 6 of 11

3.2. Load-Displacement Curves for Different Connectors
Appl.
3.2.Sci.
Figure 2017, 7, 450 the load-displacement
Load-Displacement
7 shows curves for honeycomb sandwich structures 6ofof different
Curves for Different Connectors 11

thicknesses,Figure
connected7 shows bythevarious methods. It curves
load-displacement can be forseen that each sandwich
honeycomb connection methodofhas
structures its peculiar
different
3.2. Load-Displacement Curves for Different Connectors
performance and connected
thicknesses, failure modes. At the
by various initial stage
methods. It canofbeloading,
seen thatalleach
connectors
connection have almost
method hastheits same
rigidity Figure
peculiar
and load 7 shows
performance theand
increases load-displacement
failure
for modes.
larger end At curves for
the initial
surface honeycomb sandwich
stage of loading,
displacement. structures of
As aallhigh-strength
connectors different
have almost
bolt material
thicknesses,
the same connected
rigidity and by load various methods.
increases It can besurface
seen that each connection method has boltits
has superior shear strength [36,37], the for larger
ultimate end
bearing displacement.
capability of theAscorresponding
a high-strength connector
peculiar performance and failure modes. At the initial stage of loading, all
material has superior shear strength [36,37], the ultimate bearing capability of the corresponding connectors have almost
is significantly
the higher
same rigidity andthan
loadthe ultimate
increases bearing
forthe
larger endcapability
surface of the other Astwo connectionbolt methods;
connector is significantly higher than ultimate bearing displacement.
capability of the a high-strength
other two connection
it alsomaterial
has largerhas ultimate
superior displacement.
shearultimate The ordinary
strengthdisplacement.
[36,37], the ultimate bolt connection
bearing and self-tapping bolt connector
methods; it also has larger The ordinary boltcapability
connection ofand
the self-tapping
corresponding bolt
have connector
similar
connector ultimate
ishave bearing
significantly
similar capacities.
higher
ultimate than the
bearing When
ultimatethe bearing
capacities. self-tapping
When boltofconnector
capability
the self-tapping the
boltother approaches
two connection
connector the limit,
approaches
methods;
its bearing itits
capacity
the limit, also has larger
fluctuates
bearing ultimate
capacity and thedisplacement.
connection
fluctuates The ordinary
performance
and the connection bolt
is connection
unstable.
performance and self-tapping bolt
is unstable.
connector have similar ultimate bearing capacities. When the self-tapping bolt connector approaches
the limit,
45 its bearing capacity fluctuates45 and the connection performance
45 is unstable. High-strength bolts
40
High-strength bolts
Ordinary bolts
(a) 40
High-strength bolts
Ordinary bolts (b) 40 (c) Ordinary bolts
Self-tapping bolts Self-tapping bolts Self-tapping bolts
45 35 45 35 45 35
High-strength bolts
40 30
High-strength bolts
Ordinary bolts
(a) 40 30
High-strength bolts
Ordinary bolts (b) 40 30 (c) Ordinary bolts
Load （kN ）
Load （kN ）

Load （kN ）
Self-tapping bolts Self-tapping bolts Self-tapping bolts
35 25 35 25 35 25

30 20 30 20 30 20
Load （kN ）
Load （kN ）

Load （kN ）
25 15 25 15 25 15

20 10 20 10 20 10

15 5 15 5 15 5

10 0 10 0 10 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
5 5 5
End surface displacement (mm) End surface displacement（mm） End surface displacement (mm)
0 0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Figure 7. Comparison of load-displacement curves obtained experimentally for the different types of
End surface displacement
Figure 7. Comparison of(mm)
load-displacementEndcurves
surface displacement（mm）
obtained experimentallyEndfor
surfacethe
displacement (mm)
different types of
connectors for (a) 10 mm, (b) 15 mm, and (c) 20 mm wall thickness.
connectors
Figure for (a) 10 mm,of(b)
7. Comparison 15 mm, and (c)curves
load-displacement 20 mm wall thickness.
obtained experimentally for the different types of
connectors
Figure 8forcompares
(a) 10 mm, (b)
the15load-displacement
mm, and (c) 20 mm wall curvesthickness.
measured from experiments and the
corresponding finite element simulations for the three
Figure 8 compares the load-displacement curves measured from bolt joints designs. It can be seen
experiments andthat thenumerical
corresponding
Figure
results 8 well
agree compares
with the load-displacement
experimental data: the largest curves measured
deviation is less from
than experiments and the
3.6%.
finite element simulations for the three bolt joints designs. It can be seen that numerical results agree
corresponding finite element simulations for the three bolt joints designs. It can be seen that numerical
well with experimental
results agree data:
well with the largestdata:
experimental deviation
the largest is less than 3.6%.
deviation is less than 3.6%. Expt
40
(a) Expt
FEA
40
(b) High-strength bolts
Expt
FEA
40
(c) FEA
35
High-strength bolts 35
35

High-strength bolts Expt

40 30
(a) Expt 40 30
(b)
Expt 40 30
(c) FEA
Load （kN ）

FEA
Load （kN ）

Load （kN ）

FEA High-strength bolts High-strength bolts

35 25 35 25 35 25

30 20 High-strength bolts 30 20 30 20
Load （kN ）
Load （kN ）

Load （kN ）

Self-tapping Self-tapping
25 15 25 15 25 15
bolts bolts
20 10
Self-tapping
20 10 20 10
C. T. Expt/KN FEA/KN Error/%
bolts C. T. Expt/KN FEA/KN Error/%
Self-tapping C. T.
Self-tapping
Expt/KN FEA/KN Error/%
15 5 Hs. B. 30.4 31.1 2.09 15 5 15 5 Hs. B. 34.7 34.1 -1.92
bolts bolts
Hs. B. 35.2 33.9 -3.62
St. B. 19.3 19.6 1.49
St. B. 18.8 19.0 1.10 St. B. 19.5 19.3 -1.15
10 0
Self-tapping
10 0 10 0
0 1 2C. T. 3
Expt/KN 4 FEA/KN 5 Error/% 6 0 1 2C. T. 3
Expt/KN 4FEA/KN 5 Error/% 6 0 bolts2 4 C. T.6 8
Expt/KN 10FEA/KN12 14
Error/% 16
5 5 5 EndHs.
surface
B. displacement
34.7 (mm)
34.1 -1.92
EndHs. B.
surface 30.4 31.1
displacement (mm) 2.09 End Hs.
surface
B. displacement
35.2 (mm)
33.9 -3.62
St. B. 18.8 19.0 1.10 St. B. 19.5 19.3 -1.15 St. B. 19.3 19.6 1.49
0 0 0
040 1 2 3 4 5 6 040 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
40
End surface displacement (mm) Expt Expt End surface displacement (mm) Expt
35 (d) FEA 35 (e)
End surface displacement (mm)
FEA 35 (f) FEA
C. T. Expt/KN FEA/KN Error/% C. T. Expt/KN FEA/KN Error/% C. T. Expt/KN FEA/KN Error/%
40 30 O. B.
40 30 O. B. 40 30
19.5 20.2 3.21 19.8 20.2 2.49 O. B. 20.4 20.2 -0.96
Expt Expt Expt
35 25 (d) FEA 35 25 (e) FEA (f)
Load （kN ）

Load （kN ）

35 25 FEA
Load （kN ）

C. T. Expt/KN FEA/KN Error/% C. T. Expt/KN FEA/KN Error/% C. T. Expt/KN FEA/KN

Ordinary bolts Ordinary bolts OrdinaryError/%
bolts
30 20 O. B. 19.5 20.2 3.21 30 20 O. B. 19.8 20.2 2.49 30 20 O. B. 20.4 20.2 -0.96
Load （kN ）

Load （kN ）

Load （kN ）

25 15 25 15 25 15
Ordinary bolts Ordinary bolts Ordinary bolts
20 10 20 10 20 10

15 5 15 5 15 5

10 0 10 0 10 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
5 5 5
End surface displacement (mm) End surface displacement (mm) End surface displacement (mm)
0 0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.0
1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
C.T.=Connection Type ; Hs.B.=High-strength bolts ; St.B.=Self-tapping bolts ; O.B.=Ordinary bolts
End surface displacement (mm) End surface displacement (mm) End surface displacement (mm)

Figure 8. Comparison of experimental

C.T.=Connection tests and
Type ; Hs.B.=High-strength bolts FE simulationsbolts
; St.B.=Self-tapping for the load-displacement
; O.B.=Ordinary bolts curves
relative to different bolt connections and sandwich wall thicknesses. (a–c) High strength bolts and
FigureFigure 8. Comparison
self-tapping ofofexperimental
bolts; (d–f)
8. Comparison experimental
Ordinary tests and
bolts.tests andFE FEsimulations
simulations for for
the the
load-displacement curves curves
load-displacement
relative to different bolt connections and sandwich wall thicknesses. (a–c) High strength bolts and
relative to different bolt connections and sandwich wall thicknesses. (a–c) High strength bolts and
self-tapping bolts; (d–f) Ordinary bolts.
self-tapping bolts; (d–f) Ordinary bolts.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 7 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 7 of 11

Since finite element

Since finite elementanalysis
analysisimplemented
implemented simplified
simplified constitutive
constitutive models,
models, the simulated
the simulated load-
load-displacement curves show a distinct yielding point and strengthening
displacement curves show a distinct yielding point and strengthening phase. However, experimental phase. However,
experimental
and numerical and numerical load-displacement
load-displacement curves have
curves have identical identical
growth growth trends.
trends.
When
When aa high-strength
high-strength boltbolt connector
connector is is subject
subject to to shear
shear loading,
loading, severe
severe stress
stress concentration
concentration
develops in the bolt causing bending deformations.
develops in the bolt causing bending deformations. The connection
connection plate opening is substantially
plate opening is substantially
damaged
damagedand andthe thebolt
bolthole
holeisisovalized. Because
ovalized. Because of of
thethe
relatively lowlow
relatively shear strength
shear of anofordinary
strength bolt
an ordinary
connector, the connection
bolt connector, plate and
the connection padand
plate underpadshear forceshear
under will not develop
force significant
will not develop deformation.
significant
A significant stress
deformation. concentration
A significant occurs at the bolt
stress concentration shear
occurs surface,
at the and significant
bolt shear surface, and shear deformation
significant shear
causes bolt failure.
deformation causesAs thefailure.
bolt self-tapping
As the bolt connector’s
self-tapping boltscrew threadscrew
connector’s has relatively
thread has weak mechanical
relatively weak
bite force, the bolt under load develops significant deflection and bending deformation,
mechanical bite force, the bolt under load develops significant deflection and bending deformation, which causes
conspicuous
which causeswarp deformation
conspicuous between a connection
warp deformation between a plate and honeycomb
connection sandwich sandwich
plate and honeycomb structure
(Figure
structure5f,g).
(Figure 5f,g).

3.3.
3.3. Optimization
Optimization of of
Connector Geometry
Connector and Determination
Geometry of Ultimate
and Determination Bearing Capacity
of Ultimate Bearing Capacity

3.3.1. Connector Geometry Optimization: Sensitivity of Connector Performance to Bolt

3.3.1. Connector Geometry Optimization: Sensitivity of Connector Performance to Bolt Hole-Edge Distance
Hole-Edge Distance
Figure 9a shows the load-displacement curves computed via FEA for models with various
Figure 9a shows the load-displacement curves computed via FEA for models with various
hole-edge distances. It can be seen that curves are very similar if the hole-edge distance is between
hole-edge distances. It can be seen that curves are very similar if the hole-edge distance is between
1.0d0 and 1.5d0. For the very small hole-edge distance of 0.7d0, the significantly lighter honeycomb
1.0d0 and 1.5d0 . For the very small hole-edge distance of 0.7d0 , the significantly lighter honeycomb
sandwich structure and pad section host very high stresses. The stress in the bolt hole section ranges
sandwich structure and pad section host very high stresses. The stress in the bolt hole section ranges
between 522 and 590 MPa, which exceeds the common yield strength of aluminum alloys and
between 522 and 590 MPa, which exceeds the common yield strength of aluminum alloys and produces
produces damage in the connection plate.
damage in the connection plate.
The ultimate load is about 36 kN for all connectors with hole-edge distances greater or equal to
The ultimate load is about 36 kN for all connectors with hole-edge distances greater or equal to
1.0d0 but drops down to 21.64 kN (i.e., 40% reduction in shear load bearing capacity) for the
1.0d0 but drops down to 21.64 kN (i.e., 40% reduction in shear load bearing capacity) for the hole-edge
hole-edge distance of 0.7d0.
distance of 0.7d0 .
Based on these results, we modified the geometry of the high-strength bolt connector setting the
Based on these results, we modified the geometry of the high-strength bolt connector setting the
hole-edge distance equal to 1.5d0. Load-displacement curves of optimized models including different
hole-edge distance equal to 1.5d0 . Load-displacement curves of optimized models including different
values of the bolt diameter are compared with those relative to the original design. Figure 9b shows
values of the bolt diameter are compared with those relative to the original design. Figure 9b shows
that, regardless of bolt diameter, a hole-edge distance of 1.5d0 allows to reach the same performance
that, regardless of bolt diameter, a hole-edge distance of 1.5d0 allows to reach the same performance as
as for the original design. In summary, the minimum dimensions of the connection plate and pad can
for the original design. In summary, the minimum dimensions of the connection plate and pad can be
be optimized to be 1.5 times the bolt hole diameter to ensure that the connector has sufficient bearing
optimized to be 1.5 times the bolt hole diameter to ensure that the connector has sufficient bearing
capacity yet reducing connector material consumption.
capacity yet reducing connector material consumption.

50 90

45
(a) 80 (b) D=12mm
40
70
35
60
Load（kN）

Load（kN）

30
50
25
40
D=10mm
20
30
15 The original model
2.0 times do
20 1.5 times do
10 1.5 times do
1.0 times do 10
5
0.7 times do
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Ends displacement（mm） End surface displacement（mm）

Figure 9. Load-displacement curves determined by ANSYS for (a) models with different hole-edge
Figure 9. Load-displacement
distances; curvesbolt
(b) models with different determined
diameters.by ANSYS for (a) models with different hole-edge
distances; (b) models with different bolt diameters.
 Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 8 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 8 of 11

3.3.2. Simplified Formula for Computing the Connector Ultimate Bearing Capacity
3.3.2. Simplified
A new formulaFormula was fordeveloped
Computinginthe Connector
this study toUltimate Bearing
predict the Capacity
ultimate shear strength of bolt
connectors for sandwich structures. For that purpose, the hole diameter
A new formula was developed in this study to predict the ultimate shear strength and sandwich wall thickness
of bolt
were modified in the finite element analysis. Figure 10 shows the variation of the
connectors for sandwich structures. For that purpose, the hole diameter and sandwich wall thickness connector’s ultimate
loadmodified
were (P) with in
respect to bolt
the finite diameter
element (d) and
analysis. sandwich
Figure 10 showswallthe
thickness
variation[38]
of (t).
the Shear load capacity
connector’s ultimateis
insensitive to diameter if the bolt diameter remains relatively small. In this case,
load (P) with respect to bolt diameter (d) and sandwich wall thickness [38] (t). Shear load capacity bolt shear failureisis
the dominant
insensitive mechanism
to diameter if theand thediameter
bolt overall performance of the small.
remains relatively connector basically
In this depends
case, bolt shearon the bolt
failure is
diameter. When bolt diameter increases beyond 10 mm, strength becomes sensitive
the dominant mechanism and the overall performance of the connector basically depends on the bolt to the thickness
of the sandwich
diameter. When bolt structure.
diameter Inincreases
particular, larger10
beyond thickness resultsbecomes
mm, strength in a higher connection
sensitive strength but
to the thickness of
also
the in more structure.
sandwich significantIn bolt hole deformation.
particular, The failure
larger thickness resultsmode changes
in a higher from bolt strength
connection cut-off damage
but alsoto
inhole
more wall bearing bolt
significant failure.
holeIn summary, connector
deformation. The failurestrength varies with
mode changes frombolt
bolt diameter and sandwich
cut-off damage to hole
wall thickness based on the hole diameter. In view of this, two simple
wall bearing failure. In summary, connector strength varies with bolt diameter and sandwich formulae were derived wallby
fitting results
thickness basedofonFEthe
simulations.
hole diameter. In view of this, two simple formulae were derived by fitting
results of FE simulations.

90 4.40

80
(a) 4.35
(b)
4.30
70
4.25
60
Load（kN）

4.20
50
lnP

4.15
40
4.10
30
t=10mm d=13mm
t=8mm 4.05 d=12mm
20 t=6mm d=11mm
4.00

10 3.95

0 3.90
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3
Bolt diameter（mm） lnt

Figure 10. Variation of connector’s shear load capability with respect to (a) bolt diameter and (b)
Figure 10. Variation of connector’s shear load capability with respect to (a) bolt diameter and (b)
sandwich wall thicknesses. (lnt = loge(t), lnP = loge(P)).
sandwich wall thicknesses. (lnt = loge(t), lnP = loge(P)).

(1)
(1)ForForhigh-strength
high-strength bolt
boltshear
shearfailure,
failure, the
theultimate
ultimate bearing
bearing capacity
capacity ofofthe
theconnector
connectorisis
determined
determinedasas
Nvb =b
0.85788t0.074 d1.926 f b
0.074 1.926 v b
N v = 0.85788t d fv
(The corresponding formula available in the current Chinese Steel Structure Design Specification is
N(The corresponding formula available in the current Chinese Steel Structure Design Specification is
2
b πd b
v = 4 fv )
2
πd
N vb (2)
= Forf vbbolt
) hole wall bearing failure, the ultimate bearing capacity of the connector is
4
determined as
Ncb =
(2) For bolt hole wall bearing failure, the0.85438t 0.554
ultimate bearing c
b
d1.446 fcapacity of the connector is determined as

(The corresponding formula available in bthe current 0.554 Chinese Steel Structure Design Specification is
b b b b N c = 0.85438t d 1.446 f cb
Nc = d∑ t · f c ) where f v and f c are the shear ultimate strength and compression ultimate strength of
the high-strength bolt or connection plate material, respectively; t is the thickness of the honeycomb
(The corresponding
sandwich structure; d formula available
is the bolt in the current Chinese Steel Structure Design Specification is
diameter.
b
= d new
N c The  b
t ⋅ fderivation
c ) from this work yields similar results as the existing Chinese [22], American,
and
where f v and f c are theDesign
European
b Steel Structure
b
shear Specifications [38] when
ultimate strength bolt shear failure
and compression occurs.
ultimate Under of
strength such
the
scenarios, the ultimate strength of the connector is proportional to the bolt shear bearing area. Since all
high-strength bolt or connection plate material, respectively; t is the thickness of the honeycomb
the specifications are mainly applied for steel plates and do not consider the effect of sandwich
sandwich structure; d is the bolt diameter.
wall thickness on the load bearing capacity, they are more conservative than the present approach.
The new derivation from this work yields similar results as the existing Chinese [22], American,
When bolt hole wall bearing failure occurs, the present formula significantly differs from the previous
and European Steel Structure Design Specifications [38] when bolt shear failure occurs. Under such
standards. ANSYS results indicate that bolt opening deforms and significant displacement occurs at
scenarios, the ultimate strength of the connector is proportional to the bolt shear bearing area. Since
the bolt shear surface; hence, the connector does not develop hole wall bearing failure. It indicates
all the specifications are mainly applied for steel plates and do not consider the effect of sandwich
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 9 of 11

that steel structure design specifications cannot be applied to the honeycomb sandwich structures.
Therefore, the fitting formula from the finite-element analysis and test results are more suitable for the
connection of honeycomb sandwich structures than the existing standards.

4. Conclusions
This study analyzed the performance of bolt connectors for honeycomb sandwich plates.
Different connector designs were compared by carrying out experimental tests and finite element
simulation. The main findings of the study can be summarized as follows:

(1) The failure of a high strength bolt connector is driven by severe stress concentration and minor
bending deformation of the bolt. Connection plate and pad openings are ovalized and the
excessive total displacement causes the failure of the joint. The ordinary bolt connector fails
because stress concentration on bolt shear surface causes excessive deformation. Self-tapping
bolt connector failure mechanisms are intermediate between those observed for high-strength
and self-tapping bolt connectors. The high-strength bolt connector has the highest shear capacity
followed by ordinary bolt and self-tapping bolt connectors. Hence, high strength connectors are
preferred although ordinary bolts also may be utilized.
(2) Finite element simulations are in agreement with experimental data of load-displacement curves
that were reproduced with less than 3.6% difference in terms of load-displacement curves.
The present model can hence turn useful in designing new connection systems for aluminum
sandwich structures. The geometry of the connector was optimized by setting the bolt hole-edge
distance equal to 1.5 times the bolt diameter.
(3) Numerical results validated by experimental data were fitted to obtain a very simple formula
that predicts the connector’s ultimate shear load bearing capacity. The new approach is less
conservative than Chinese standards as it accounts for the contribution of the sandwich wall
thickness to shear load capacity. This may be the starting point for future revisions of design
specifications that should be used for a new honeycomb sandwich structural system.

Acknowledgments: This study was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant
No. 51578136.
Author Contributions: Caiqi Zhao and Weidong Zheng conceived and designed the experiments; Weidong Zheng
performed the experiments; Jun Ma and Yangjian Zhao analyzed the data; Jun Ma and Caiqi Zhao contributed
reagents/materials/analysis tools; Caiqi Zhao wrote the paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Ma, Y.X.; Zheng, Y.D.; Meng, H.Y.; Song, W.H.; Yao, X.F.; Lv, H.X. Heterogeneous PVA hydrogels with
micro-cells of both positive and negative Poisson's ratios. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 2013, 23, 22–31.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Dirks, J.-H.; Dürr, V. Biomechanics of the stick insect antenna: Damping properties and structural correlates
of the cuticle. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 2011, 4, 2031–2042. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Koester, K.J.; Barth, H.D.; Ritchie, R.O. Effect of aging on the transverse toughness of human cortical bone:
Evaluation by R-curves. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 2011, 4, 1504–1513. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Donius, A.E.; Liu, A.; Berglund, L.A.; Ulrike, G.K. Wegst Superior mechanical performance of highly porous,
anisotropic nanocellulose–montmorillonite aerogels prepared by freeze casting. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater.
2014, 37, 88–99.
5. Tuo, W.Y.; Chen, J.X.; Wu, Z.S.; Xie, J.; Wang, Y. Characteristics of the tensile mechanical properties of fresh
and dry forewings of beetles. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2016, 65, 51–58. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Chen, J.X.; Zu, Q.; Wu, G.; Xie, J. Review of beetle forewing structure and biomimetic applications in
China(II). Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2015, 50, 620–633. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Chen, J.X.; Gu, C.; Guo, S.; Wan, C.; Wang, X.; Xie, J.; Hu, X. Integrated honeycomb technology motivated by
the structure of beetle forewings. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2012, 32, 1813–1817. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 10 of 11

8. Zhang, X.M.; Liu, C.; Chen, J.X.; Tao, Y.; Gu, Y. The influence mechanism of processing holes on the flexural
properties of biomimetic integrated honeycomb plates. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2016, 6, 798–803. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
9. Chen, J.X.; He, C.L.; Gu, C.L.; Liu, J.X.; Mi, C.W.; Guo, J.S. Compressive and flexural properties biomimetic
integrated honeycomb plates. Mater. Des. 2014, 64, 214–220. [CrossRef]
10. Chen, J.X.; Tuo, W.Y.; Zhang, X.M.; He, C.L.; Xie, J.; Liu, C. Compressive failure modes and parameter
optimization of the trabecular structure of biomimetic fully integrated honeycomb plates. Mater. Sci. Eng. C
2016, 69, 255–261. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
11. Bourada, M.; Tounsi, A.; Houari, M.S.A.; Adda Bedia, E.A. A new four-variable refined plate theory for thermal
buckling analysis of functionally graded sandwich plates. J. Sand. Struct. Mater. 2011, 14, 5–33. [CrossRef]
12. Zyniszewski, S.S.; Smith, B.H.; Hajjar, J.F.; Arwade, S.R.; Schafer, B.W. Local buckling strength of steel foam
sandwich panels. Thin-Walled Struct. 2012, 59, 11–19. [CrossRef]
13. Boudjemai, A.; Amri, R.; Mankour, A.; Salem, H.; Bouanane, M.H.; Boutchicha, D. Modal Analysis and
Testing of Hexagonal Honeycomb Plates Used for Satellite Structural Design. Mater. Des. 2012, 35, 266–275.
[CrossRef]
14. Zhao, C.Q.; Ma, J. Assembled Honeycombed Sheet Light Empty Stomach Building and Roof Structure
System. Patent Application No. 200810100745.X; Publication No. CN101270595A, 21 April 2010.
15. Zhao, C.Q.; Ma, J.; Tao, J. Experimental study on load capacity of new fabricated honeycomb panel open-web
roof structures. J. Southeast Univ. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 2014, 44, 626–630.
16. Tao, J. Experimental Study on Lightweighted Roof Structures Based on Honeycomb Panel in High
Performance. Master’s Thesis, School of Civil Engineering of Southeast University, Nanjing, China, 2012.
17. Zhao, C.Q.; Zheng, W.D.; Ma, J.; Zhao, Y.J. Lateral compressive buckling performance of aluminum
honeycomb panels for long-span hollow core roofs. Materials 2016, 9, 444. [CrossRef]
18. Mccarthy, M.A.; Mccarthy, C.T.; Padhi, G.S. A simple method for determining the effects of bolt–hole
clearance on load distribution in single-column multi-bolt composite joints. Compos. Struct. 2006, 73, 78–87.
[CrossRef]
19. Quinn, W.J.; Matthews, F.L. The Effect of Stacking Sequence on the Pin-Bearing Strength in Glass Fibre
Reinforced Plastic. J. Compos. Mater. 1977, 11, 139–145. [CrossRef]
20. Whitney, J.M.; Nuismer, R.J. Stress Fracture Criteria for Laminated Composites Containing Stress
Concentrations. J. Compos. Mater. 1974, 8, 253–265. [CrossRef]
21. Chang, F.K.; Scott, R.A.; Springer, G.S. Failure of Composite Laminates Containing Pin Loaded
Holes—Method of Solution. J. Compos. Mater. 1984, 18, 255–278. [CrossRef]
22. Industry Standard of the People’s Republic of China JGJ82-2011. In Technical Specification for High Strength Bolt
Connections of Steel Structures; Ministry of Housing and Urban Rural Development of the People’s Republic
of China: Beijing, China, 2011.
23. Standardization Administration of China GJB130.1-86. In The Generals of Test Method for Properties of
Adhesive-Bonded Aluminum Honeycomb-Sandwich Structure and Core; Standard Press of China: Beijing,
China, 1986.
24. Kim, T.S.; Yoo, J.H.; Roeder, C.W. Experimental investigation on strength and curling influence of bolted
connections in thin-walled carbon steel. Thin-Walled Struct. 2015, 91, 1–12. [CrossRef]
25. Ma, H.-H.; Issa, A.M.; Fan, F.; Adeoti, G.O. An experimental and numerical study of a semi-rigid bolted-plate
connections (B.P.C.). Thin-Walled Struct. 2015, 88, 82–89. [CrossRef]
26. Yu, C.; Panyanouvong, M.X. Bearing strength of cold-formed steel bolted connections with a gap.
Thin-Walled Struct. 2013, 67, 110–115. [CrossRef]
27. Jam, J.E.; Ghaziani, N.O. Numerical and experimental investigation of bolted joints, International. J. Eng.
Sci. Technol. 2011, 3, 285–296.
28. Satasivam, S.; Bai, Y. Mechanical performance of bolted modular GFRP composite sandwich structures using
standard and blind bolts. Compos. Struct. 2014, 117, 59–70. [CrossRef]
29. Kim, T.S.; Kuwamura, H.; Kim, S.; Lee, Y.T.; Cho, T. Investigation on ultimate strength of thin-walled steel
single shear bolted connections with two bolts using finite element analysis. Thin-Walled Struct. 2009, 47,
1191–1202. [CrossRef]
30. Kim, T.S.; Kuwamura, H. Finite element modeling of bolted connections in thin-walled stainless steel plates
under static shear. Thin-Walled Struct. 2007, 45, 407–421. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 450 11 of 11

31. Fallahnezhad, K. Andrew Steele and Reza H. Oskouei, Failure mode analysis of aluminium alloy 2024-T3 in
double-lap bolted joints with single and double fasteners; A Numerical and Experimental Study. Materials
2015, 8, 3195–3209. [CrossRef]
32. Rezaeifard, M.; Salami, S.J.; Dehkordi, M.B.; Sadighi, M. A new nonlinear model for studying a sandwich
panel with thin composite faces and elastic–plastic core. Thin-Walled Struct. 2016, 107, 119–137. [CrossRef]
33. Mallela, U.K.; Upadhyay, A. Buckling load prediction of laminated composite stiffened panels subjected to
in-plane shear using artificial neural networks. Thin-Walled Struct. 2016, 102, 158–164. [CrossRef]
34. Hassanli, S.; Samali, B. Buckling analysis of laminated composite curved panels reinforced with linear and
non-linear distribution of Shape Memory Alloys. Thin-Walled Struct. 2016, 106, 9–17. [CrossRef]
35. Khandelwal, R.P.; Chakrabarti, A.; Bhargava, P. Effect of interfacial imperfection on bending behavior of
composites and sandwich laminates by an efficient C0 FE model. Thin-Walled Struct. 2014, 82, 170–182.
[CrossRef]
36. Cai, Y.C.; Young, B. Bearing factors of cold-formed stainless steel double shear bolted connections at elevated
temperatures. Thin-Walled Struct. 2016, 98, 212–229. [CrossRef]
37. Cho, Y.H.; Kim, T.S. Estimation of ultimate strength in single shear bolted connections with aluminum alloys
(6061-T6). Thin-Walled Struct. 2016, 101, 43–57. [CrossRef]
38. Pan, B.; Shi, Y.; Wang, Y. The Effect of Yield-to-ultimate Ratio on the Bolted Connection under Static Shear.
J. Shenyang Jianzhu Univ. 2012, 28, 501–506.

© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).