Materials Research Express

PAPER

Performance evaluation of cracked aluminum alloy repaired with carbon

fiber reinforced polymer for aerospace application
To cite this article: Shahid Tamboli et al 2019 Mater. Res. Express 6 115326

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 192.236.36.29 on 23/10/2019 at 15:13

 Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019) 115326 https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/ab493c

PAPER

Performance evaluation of cracked aluminum alloy repaired with

carbon fiber reinforced polymer for aerospace application
RECEIVED
30 May 2019
REVISED
10 September 2019
ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION
Shahid Tamboli, Anand Pandey, Arunkumar Bongale1 and Satish Kumar
30 September 2019 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Symbiosis Institute of Technology, Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Lavale, Pune.
PUBLISHED Maharasthra State, India
1
11 October 2019 Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.
E-mail: shahidt@sitpune.edu.in, anand.pandey@sitpune.edu.in, arunbongale1980@gmail.com and Satishkumar.vc@gmail.com

Keywords: CFRP, crack repair, stress intensity factor, J-integral, delamination, interfacial shear stress

Abstract
Composite patch repairing technique of damaged structure has a substantial potential in aircraft
maintenance and crack repair in Aluminium alloy. In this work unidirectional Carbon Fiber
Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) patch separation from Aluminium alloy surface is studied through
interfacial shear stress point of view whereas earlier studies focused their attention on fracture
toughness parameters like stress intensity factor (K) and J-integral. These studies elaborated the
importance of patch shape, size and material on fracture toughness. To study interfacial shear stress
inclined crack is made in Aluminium alloy sheet and CFRP patch is applied by epoxy adhesives. When
the repaired Aluminium alloy model is simulated in Abaqus the numerical solution showed reduction
in the J-integral but in actual experiments patches tend to delaminate from the leading edge and the
crack face. It is observed that out of plane shear stresses t 23 play an important role in delaminating the
patch from the Aluminium alloy surface. To suppress the delamination by reducing interfacial shear
stress, ply thickness is varied by suggested ply drop technique. Design of experiment is conducted for
optimum sequence of CFRP ply. Three configurations show reduced interfacial shear stress. This is
validated by testing the specimen on universal testing machine.

1. Introduction

Aircrafts are subjected to various static and dynamic loads during their service life. It is uneconomical to replace
the aircraft part due to short budgets and higher material procurement costs. It also leads to loss of man hours
and aircraft availability. Hence it is necessary to repair the damaged aircraft to improve its service life,
maintainability, and reliability. Aluminium alloy structures can be repaired by rivets and bolts. This requires
drilling and increases the stress concentration and chances of hidden corrosion. Whereas repairing done by
adhesively bonded composite patches restores the strength and stiffness of components without these
drawbacks [1]. Composite repair technique for fractured Aluminium alloy panels was introduced in
Aeronautical and Maritime Research Laboratory, Australia where the repair of cracks had been demonstrated
which are perpendicular to the loading direction using boron fiber reinforced polymers. The focus was on the
reduction of fracture toughness parameter [2].
A patch is applied on both the sides of the parent skin in symmetrical or double side patching whereas in
single-side patching it is applied on accessible side of the structure. It was recommended to use double-sided
patch wherever possible [3].In this study finite element and experimental analysis was performed to monitor the
delamination in CFRP laminates [4]. The effect of a thick stiffened plates on a patch was studied and it was found
that the role of neutral axis is important in a single sided patch [5]. P-convergent transition element were
developed for modelling the plates repaired with a patch [6]. But in many of real time applications the rear side is
not accessible for repairing. Single side patch repairing is the only option in such cases. It was found that single
sided patch induces secondary bending moment due to loading eccentricity at the patched cross section and if
patch thickness is minimized then it will reduce the loading eccentricity and secondary bending moment [7].

© 2019 IOP Publishing Ltd

Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019) 115326 S Tamboli et al

Single sided repaired specimen has more SIF than the double sided one. To reduce it for single sided repairs,
alternative use of transversely graded material and unbalanced lamina was proposed [8]. Stress intensity factor
(K), J-integral (J), strain energy release rate (G), CTOD and CTOA are used for the evaluation of strength and
efficiency of adhesively bonded repairs. In linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) K and G, whereas in elastic
plastic fracture mechanics (EPFM) J-integral and CTOD are used. J -integral has minimum effect of singularity
on accuracy because of its path independent character and can calculate its value away from the crack tip [9].
Advancements in the calculations of J-Integral for experimental estimation is discussed in this study [10]. Boron
fiber reinforcement polymer reduces more SIF than CFRP [11]. Patch at both side of the crack reduces more SIF
than that of a patch on one side of a crack [12]. Patching sequence and fiber orientation has its effect on load
carrying capacity of a specimen [13]. But SIF reduction is not a sufficient criteria to predict efficiency and
strength of a composite patch repair. Possibility of delamination or separation of a patch still remain a concern
even if the SIF is less. Shear and peel stresses in the adhesive layer affects the patch bonding. Among the parent
metal, adhesive and the composite material, the weakest link is adhesive layer. In fact adhesive fails before the
composite material [14, 15]. The thickness of an adhesive has a crucial effect on delamination in bonded
composite repairing technique [16]. To study delamination, intra laminar and inter laminar cohesive elements
are used in finite element solver [17] while in another study cohesive zone modelling technique is used [18].
Repair efficiency has negative influence if adhesive disbond grows perpendicular to the crack [19, 20]. Patch
shape, geometric and material non-linearity has significant effect on repair efficiency [21]. Experiments were
performed with square, circular, rectangular, elliptical and extended octagonal patch shapes and best results
were obtained with extended octagonal [22] whereas in another study rectangular patches were found to be
beneficial for durability of bonded composite repair [23]. Use of thin ply instead of standard plies reduced
interlaminar stresses [24]. CFRP was used in manufacturing Magnesium alloy based FMLs and their fracture
behavior was tested by tensile and low velocity impact test [25]. Factors influencing the fracture toughness of
natural fiber composites are reviewed in this study [26]. Use of Carbon Fiber Reinforce Polymer and Glass Fiber
Reinforced Polymer as an aircraft wing material were studied [27].
From the literature review and referring the previous studies in the area of crack repair of Aluminium alloys,
it is evident that various methods have been employed to repair and re strengthen the failed structure. Some of
the researches have focused on study of structure repaired by conventional methods such as using fasteners
where as many have concentrated on repair through composite patch application. Composite repair technique
of a cracked structure has emerged as one of the promising methods, but delamination or separation of a patch
during loading condition needs to be addressed. Earlier studies focused their attention majorly on evaluating
and decreasing the critical values of fracture toughness parameters like K and J integral and there is a scope to
evaluate the repair technique with an objective to reduce the interfacial shear stress which is a major cause of
patch delamination.
In view of above observations, the present study is carried out to investigate the performance of a composite
crack repair method to repair inclined cracks in structures. For the purpose of study, unidirectional Carbon
Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) is used. As Aluminium alloys are generally used for majority of the aircraft
structures, Al6061, a widely used Aluminium alloy, which is also termed as aircraft alloy is used for the study
purpose.
To study the performance of repaired structure, inclined crack is formed in Aluminium alloy specimen and
CFRP patch is applied at one side only. Sequence of different gsm (gram per square meter) CFRP patches and the
thickness of the ply are taken as design variables for the study. These combinations are simulated in Abaqus to
get the results for interfacial shear stress whereas experiments are performed on universal testing machine to
observe the actual results.

2. Geometry and specification of repaired specimen

Thin Aluminium alloy 6061-T6 sheet of 1 mm thickness is chosen for the study since it is widely used in
manufacturing of aircraft structures and test samples are prepared as per ASTM D3039/D3039M-06 standards.
These specimens are tested on the universal tensile testing machine under uniaxial loading to calculate average
properties and actual elastic-plastic stress-strain data. Aluminium alloy’s (6061-T6) stress strain values are
shown in figure 1. Values obtained for young’s modulus, yield stress and ultimate tensile stress are 70 GPa,
263 MPa and 290 MPa. Specimen and crack dimensions are shown in figure 2. It can be seen that crack is starting
from the edge and it is extending up to the middle line of the specimen.
CFRP (unidirectional Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer) is considered for the study. The weight of carbon
fiber sheet is measured in gram per square meter (gsm). 200 gsm, 300 gsm and 600 gsm fabric are chosen for the
study and their thickness is taken as 0.11 mm, 0.22 mm and 0.60 mm respectively. To calculate nine elastic
constants of the CFRP patch, carbon fiber and matrix volume fraction is taken as 0.42 and 0.58 respectively.

2
Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019) 115326 S Tamboli et al

Figure 1. Stress versus strain graph of Aluminium 6061-T6.

Figure 2. Specimen with crack.

Table 1. CFRP elastic constants.

E1(GPa) E2(GPa) E3(GPa) G12(GPa) G13(GPa) G23(GPa) υ12 υ13 υ23

92.27 8.45 8.45 2.60 2.60 1.37 0.29 0.29 0.4

Elastic constant are calculated by Halpin Tsai rule of mixture [28, 29]. Table 1 shows nine CFRP elastic
constants. Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio and the density of carbon fiber is taken as 220 GPa, 0.2 and
1860 kg m−3 respectively whereas for the Epoxy it is taken as 2.85 GPa, 0.4 and 1200 kg m−3 respectively.

3. Numerical technique

3D finite element analysis is carried out in Abaqus. It creates the crack and compute J-integral by contour
integral method. 1.2 mm global element size is selected for meshing. 0.6 mm element size is selected for the
region near the crack tip. The mesh is obtained by a combination of structured and sweepable techniques.

3
Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019) 115326 S Tamboli et al

Figure 3. Collapsed three-dimensional [C3D20(RH)] quarter point element.

Figure 4. Meshing at crack tip.

Modified C3D20(RH) element is used for meshing. The stresses are inversely proportional to square root of
radius (r) at the crack tip. But theoretically r tends to zero which may lead to infinite stress. To avoid singularity
problem at the crack tip isoparametric elements with mid-side nodes are used [30]. This element has extra
displacement function involving r term per node to suppress the singularity problem. This quarter point
element is shown in figure 3 whereas figure 4 shows the enlarged view of mesh at the crack tip. Tie constrain is
applied between contacts in interaction module. Nine elastic constants of CFRP and the stress strain data of
Aluminium alloy are inputted to simulate elastic plastic deformation.

3.1. J-Integral
Contour integral technique in Abaqus is used to evaluate JC integral with 200 MPa far field stress. Far field stress
is the stress applied along the length and at the end of the plate. The values of JC integral are mentioned in table 2.
For unpatched specimen JC integral is found to be 99.72 KJ m−2. In blunt edge model (200-300-600) the length
for all plies is same as 100 mm. As the gsm increases JCdecreases which suggests the better fracture toughness of
the repaired specimen but in experiments delamination is found for the patch configurations mentioned in
table 2.

3.2. Interfacial shear stress

Although the JC integral shown in numerical solution is reduced to 2.574 KJ m−2, the patch got separated from
the parent material. This is observed and validated in experimental testing. Since the loading direction is ‘2’
which is in line with the carbon fiber orientation, out of plane interfacial shear stresses τ23 and τ13 play an
important role in separating the CFRP patch. Figure 5 shows τ23 and τ13 on an elemental interface between
Aluminium alloy (WXYZ) and an adhesive element. Resultant of these stress is taken as the mean interfacial
shear stress (τf) which is calculated by equation (1). It is found in first few simulations that τ13 is negligible

4
Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019) 115326 S Tamboli et al

Figure 5. Elemental interface between Aluminium alloy and adhesive.

Figure 6. (a) Front and side view of specimen repaired with X gsm CFRP patch. (b)–(d) Interfacial shear and normal stress distribution
for 200 gsm, 300 gsm and 600 gsm CFRP patch respectively.

compared to τ23, so further study is focused on τ23. Interfacial shear stress (τ23) and normal stress (σ22) are
observed along the line ‘CD’ which is marked at 15 mm from a crack side edge. Line ‘CD’ is shown in figure 6(a).

tf = t23 2 + t13 2 (1)

Figure 6(a) shows front and side view of specimen repaired with X gsm CFRP patch. Here X refers to 200
gsm, 300 gsm and 600 gsm. Whereas figures 6(b)–(d) shows interfacial shear and normal stress for a 200 gsm.
300 gsm and 600 gsm CFRP patch respectively. Leading edge ‘AB’ and crack face ‘RS’ are observed as the patch
delaminates from these lines. In figure 6(b) interfacial shear stress at leading edge ‘AB’ is 9.78 MPa and at crack
face ‘RS’ it is 78.86 MPa. It drops to zero within 5 mm. This sudden rise and fall at leading edge and crack face
may lead to adhesive failure and patch separation. Tensile stress decreases from 180.63 MPa at leading edge ‘AB’
to 44.57 MPa at crack face ‘RS’. At crack face, there is physical absence of Aluminium alloy which leads to sudden
drop of tensile stress. For 300 gsm patch interfacial shear stress at ‘AB’ and ‘RS’ is 10.81 MPa and 65.98 MPa
respectively as shown in figure 6(c). In this case tensile stress drops from 189.2 MPa at leading edge ‘AB’ to

5
Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019) 115326 S Tamboli et al

Table 2. JC Integral values.

Sr. no. Patch configuration JC in KJ/m2

1 Unpatched Specimen 99.72

2 200 gsm 27.82
3 300 gsm 18.73
4 600 gsm 8.921
5 Blunt edge model (200-300-600) 2.574

Table 3. Magnitude of stress for all ply drop configurations.

Interfacial Shear stresses (MPa). From

numerical analysis

Patch configura-
tion for Design of
Sr. no. experiment AB A′B′ A″B″ RS

1 200-200-200 2.56 0.63 −0.42 43.13

2 200-200-300 3.94 0.72 −0.63 40.28
3 200-200-600 3.80 0.40 −1.08 31.88
4 200-300-200 3.67 0.51 −1.25 37.49
5 200-300-300 3.89 0.50 −0.65 35.49
6 200-300-600 3.89 0.51 −1.27 35.60
7 200-600-200 3.89 0.77 −1.27 36.68
8 200-600-300 3.79 0.78 −0.65 35.67
9 200-600-600 3.93 0.82 −1.27 31.38
10 300-200-200 4.13 0.64 −1.28 35.94
11 300-200-300 4.27 0.73 −0.74 34.02
12 300-200-600 4.32 0.75 −1.38 33.87
13 300-300-200 4.37 0.75 −1.27 34.98
14 300-300-300 4.42 −0.72 −1.24 32.28
15 300-300-600 4.45 −0.86 −1.48 22.71
16 300-600-200 4.67 −1.50 −1.30 29.02
17 300-600-300 4.70 −1.77 −1.30 25.53
18 300-600-600 4.83 −1.90 −1.90 23.55
19 600-200-200 5.33 −1.41 −2.03 27.57
20 600-200-300 5.19 −1.71 −3.23 19.03
21 600-200-600 5.29 −1.61 −4.97 21.51
22 600-300-200 5.34 −1.73 −2.98 23.98
23 600-300-300 5.81 −1.78 −3.61 22.28
24 600-300-600 6.02 −1.98 −4.35 20.98
25 600-600-200 6.14 −2.29 −2.29 24.35
26 600-600-300 6.07 −3.94 −3.94 19.96
27 600-600-600 6.96 −3.98 −4.54 17.09

52.59 MPa at crack face ‘RS’. Figure 6(d) shows the stress distribution for 600 gsm CFRP patch along the line CD.
For 600 gsm CFRP patch interfacial stress rises from 12.86 MPa at leading edge to 63.64 MPa at crack face
whereas tensile stress drops from 187.68 MPa at leading edge ‘AB’ to 63.39 MPa at crack face ‘RS’.

4. Ply drop

From the above data obtained from numerical solution it can be concluded that thin patch at leading edge and
thick patch at crack face ensures low values of interfacial shear stress. Hence ply drop technique is suggested in
this study wherein the thickness of the CFRP patch increases towards the crack tip. To achieve varying thickness,
it is suggested to have different lengths for first, second and third ply.
With the permutation and combination of 200, 300 and 600 gsm, 27 further configurations are evaluated in
Abaqus and the behavior of interfacial shear stress is observed at leading edge AB, A′B′, A″B″ and RS. These
configurations are mentioned in table 3. Length of the first ply is 100 mm whereas for the second and third ply it
is 70 mm and 55 mm respectively. In this way the varying thickness of the final CFRP patch is ensured. Figure 7
shows varying lengths of different ply (a) and the distribution of stresses in a 300-300-600 configuration CFRP

6
Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019) 115326 S Tamboli et al

Figure 7. (a) Front and side view of specimen repaired with ply drop 300-300-600 configuration, (b) Interfacial shear stress
distribution for ply drop 300-300-600 configuration, (c) Normal stress distribution for ply drop 300-300-600 configuration.

patch (b and c). Interfacial shear stress at AB is 4.45 MPa then within 4 mm it drops to zero. At A′B′ and A″B″ it is
found as −0.86 MPa and −1.48 MPa respectively. At crack face ‘RS’ it is 22.71 MPa. Due to gradual increase in
overall ply thickness it doesn’t drop suddenly from leading edge to crack face, which ensures gradual sharing of
tensile load by the CFRP patch. This gradual sharing of load can be compared with figures 6(b)–(d). It can be
seen that tensile load is gradually distributed at both the sides of the crack in 300-300-600 configuration
compared to 200 gsm, 300 gsm and 600 gsm configuration.

4.1. Optimum ply drop selection

Interfacial shear stress values (τ23) for different configurations at AB, A′B′, A″B″ and crack face RS are mentioned
in table 3. Gradual distribution of interfacial shear stress is desirable throughout the patch sequence. A sudden
rise or drop of its value causes the delamination of the CFRP patch. Difference between the values at AB, A′B′, A″
B″ and RS should be minimum. Few configurations give less values at one of the locations only so they are not
selected as the best ones. Based on this criterion, 200-600-600, 300-300-600 and 300-600-600 ply drop
configurations are selected.

7
Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019) 115326 S Tamboli et al

Table 4. Magnitude of tensile stress for all ply drop configurations.

Average stress
Stress Stress at a point
Patch from from where patch
Sr. no. configuration Test 1 Test 2 delaminates

1 200-200-200 170.32 168.80 169.56

2 200-200-300 165.34 160.12 162.73
3 200-200-600 239.39 243.17 241.28
4 200-300-200 218.57 222.17 220.37
5 200-300-300 235.43 243.49 239.46
6 200-300-600 233.26 229.72 231.49
7 200-600-200 238.68 232.18 235.43
8 200-600-300 240.46 237.04 238.75
9 200-600-600 257.32 261.80 259.56
10 300-200-200 185.65 175.25 180.45
11 300-200-300 196.67 192.17 194.42
12 300-200-600 201.34 195.42 198.38
13 300-300-200 198.35 204.57 201.46
14 300-300-300 205.34 201.58 203.46
15 300-300-600 260.64 264.82 262.73
16 300-600-200 179.35 177.55 178.45
17 300-600-300 190.42 186.92 188.67
18 300-600-600 255.34 260.04 257.69
19 600-200-200 175.67 163.67 169.67
20 600-200-300 172.34 164.56 168.45
21 600-200-600 165.85 151.99 158.92
22 600-300-200 160.56 152.34 156.45
23 600-300-300 162.82 157.76 160.29
24 600-300-600 160.46 154.38 157.42
25 600-600-200 161.92 155.00 158.46
26 600-600-300 150.73 153.95 152.34
27 600-600-600 140.48 146.82 143.65

5. Experimental technique

To validate the results obtained by the numerical study crack is made by wire cut EDM and it is further sharpen
by the sharp industrial grade blade. Sharp crack at the crack tip gives more stress concentration and ensures the
maximum magnitude of the stress at the crack tip. This is done to simulate worse condition of a crack for the
actual experiment. Vacuum bagging technique is used to apply pressure for CFRP bonding [31]. Surface
preparation increases surface energy and removes contaminants from the surface. Surface preparation could be
done by grit blasting technique, mechanical treatment of needle gun or abrasive paper. It is practically easy and
effective to use abrasive paper for the surface treatment [32]. The 80-grit abrasive paper is found to be effective
for this purpose. After preparing the surface, epoxy resin 520 F and hardener 758 are mixed as per vendor’s
recommendation and uniformly applied. The CFRP is applied on a single side only since the study is confined to
asymmetric patching. 0.7 bar pressure is maintained in the vacuum bag during the curing process at room
temperature. The time required for complete curing was about 30 h. Table 3 shows the numerical analysis and its
result, to validate the results same configuration is repeated for the actual experiments. Each configuration is
tested twice and average value of maximum tensile stress is reported in table 4. Maximum stress for a particular
combination is taken as a stress at which the CFRP patch got separated from the Aluminium surface or the
tearing of the specimen, whichever is earlier.
These specimens are tested on the universal tensile testing machine with 0.1 mm min−1 cross-head speed as
per, standard test method for tensile properties of polymer matrix composite materials (ASTM D3039/
D3039M-06) [33]. Objective of this study is to find out an optimum ply configuration which will sustain
maximum stress before the delamination of CFRP patch. In real application the maximum operating stress is
defined by the factor of safety. But in this study the stress is increased till the separation is noticed.
Excluding three optimum ply drop configurations CFRP patch gets separated at an average stress of
187.91 MPa which is less than far field stress applied in Abaqus. Ply drop 300-300-600 carried 262.73 MPa stress
and CFRP patch remained bonded. 200-600-600 and 300-600-600 ply drop configuration sustained 259.56 MPa
and 257.69 MPa stress respectively.

8
Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019) 115326 S Tamboli et al

6. Conclusions

Ply drop CFRP patch repair technique suggested in this work is useful for the crack repair applications where the
other side is not accessible. Experimental observations and results validated the findings of numerical analysis.
Following conclusions are drawn from the above work.
The Interfacial shear stress studied in this work is more important aspect than the fracture toughness in
CFRP crack repairing technique. Earlier studies focused their attention on varying patch size, shape and
thickness to increase the fracture toughness of the repaired specimen. At leading edge interfacial shear stress has
far less value than at crack face. Probability of patch delamination from crack face is much higher than at leading
edge. It is found that in ply drop technique interfacial shear stress at leading edge and crack face is reducing
gradually and uniform stress distribution is observed throughout the patch which suppresses the ply separation
from Aluminium alloy surface.
The tests were conducted under more than twenty-seven different ply drop configurations to evaluate the
load bearing capacity of the repaired specimen and it was found that the configurations with 200 gsm—600 gsm
—600 gsm, 300 gsm—600 gsm—600 gsm, and 300 gsm—300 gsm—600 gsm patch configurations have better
load bearing capacity and withstood 259.56 MPa, 257.69 MPa and 262.73 MPa stress respectively. It can be
concluded that for the experiments conducted, a ply configuration with 300 gsm—300 gsm—600 gsm patch
yields maximum load bearing capacity.

ORCID iDs

Arunkumar Bongale https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1942-9179

Satish Kumar https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6788-0952

References
[1] Baker A A 1984 Repair of cracked or defective metallic aircraft components with advanced fibre compositc: an overview of australian
work Composite Structures 2 153–81
[2] Baker A A, Callinan R J, Davis M J, Jones R and Williams J G 1984 Repair of MIRAGE III aircraft using the BFRP crack-patching
technique Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech. 2 1–15
[3] Srilakshmi R, Ramaji M and Chinthapenta V 2015 Fatigue crack growth study of CFRP patch repaired Al 2014-T6 panel having an
inclined center crack using FEA and DIC Eng. Fract. Mech. 134 182–201
[4] Xu W, Cao M, Li X, Radzienski M, Ostachowicz W and Bai R 2017 Delamination monitoring in CFRP laminated plates under noisy
conditions using complex-wavelet 2D curvature mode shapes Smart Mater. Struct. 26 104008
[5] Kwon Y W and Hall B L 2015 Analyses of cracks in thick stiffened plates repaired with single-sided composite patch Compos. Struct.
727–37
[6] Ahn J S and Basu P K 2011 Locally refined p-FEM modeling of patch repaired plates Compos. Struct. 93 1704–16
[7] Erroune H, Sereir Z and Chateauneufz A 2014 Numerical model for optimal design of composite patch repair of cracked aluminum
plates under tension International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 49 64–72
[8] Ramaji M and Srilakshmi R 2012 Design of composite patch reinforcement applied to mixed-mode cracked panel using finite element
analysis J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 31 585–95
[9] Xian-Kui Z and Joyce J A 2012 Review of fracture toughness (G, K, J, CTOD, CTOA) testing and standardization Eng. Fract. Mech. 85
1–12
[10] Xian-Kui Z 2011 Advances in Development of J-Integral Experimental Estimation, Testing and Standardization ASME. Pressure Vessels
and Piping Conference: Vols. Materials and Fabrication, Parts A and B 6 1239–46
[11] Gu L, Kasavajhala A R M and Zhao S 2011 Finite element analysis of cracks in aging aircraft structures with bonded composite-patch
repairs Composites: Part B 42
[12] Yu Q Q, Chen T, Gu X L and Zhao X L 2016 Boundary element analysis of edge cracked steel plates strengthened by CFRP laminates
Thin-WalledStructures 100 147–57
[13] Cheng P, Gong X-J, Aivazzadeh S and Xiao X 2014 Experimental observation of tensile behavior of patch repaired composites Polym.
Test. 34 146–54
[14] Anyfantis K N 2012 Finite element predictions of composite-to-metal bonded joints with ductile adhesive materials Compos. Struct. 94
2632–9
[15] Papanikos P, Tserpes K I and Pantelakis S 2007 Initiation and progression of composite patch debonding in adhesively repaired cracked
metallic sheets Compos. Struct. 81 303–11
[16] Ouinas D, Bouiadjra B B, Himouri S and Benderdouche N 2012 Progressive edge cracked aluminium plate repaired with adhesively
bonded composite patch under full width disbond Composites: Part B 43 805–11
[17] Xue J, Wang W-X, Zhang J-Z, Wu S-J and Li H 2015 Experimental and numerical study on the tensile behaviour of UACS/Al fibre
metal laminate Appl. Compos. Mater. 22 489–505
[18] Hossein-Toudeshky H, Jasemzadeh A and Mohammadi B 2013 Investigation of effective parameters on composite patch debond in
under static and cyclic loading using cohesive elements Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 74 67–75
[19] Bouiadjra B B, Oudad W, Albedah A, Benyahia F and Belhouari M 2012 Effects of the adhesive disband on the performances of bonded
composite repairs in aircraft structures Mater. Des. 37 89–95
[20] Ouinas D, Bouiadjra B B, Achour B and Benderdouche N 2009 Modelling of a cracked aluminium plate repaired with composite
octagonal patch Mater. Des. 30 590–5
[21] Pandey P C and Kumar S 2010 Adhesively bonded patch repair with composites Def. Sci. J. 60 60

9
Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019) 115326 S Tamboli et al

[22] Ramaji M, Srilakshmi R and Bhanu Prakash M 2013 Towards optimization of patch shape on the performance of bonded composite
repair using FEM Composites: Part B 45 710–20
[23] Benyahia F, Albedah A and Bouiadjra B B 2014 Analysis of the adhesive damage for different patch shapes in bonded composite repair
of aircraft structures Mater. Des. 54 18–24
[24] Guillamet G, Turon A, Costa J and Linde P 2016 A quick procedure to predict free-edge delamination in thin-ply laminates under
tension Eng. Fract. Mech. 168 29–39
[25] Zhou P, Wu X, Pan Y, Tao Y, Wu G and Huang Z 2018 Mechanical properties of carbon fiber-reinforced polymer/magnesium alloy
hybrid laminates Materials Research Express 5 046523
[26] AL-Maharma A Y and Sendur P 2018 Review of the main factors controlloing the fracture toughness and impact strength properties of
natural composites Material Research Express 6 022001
[27] Das S K and Roy S 2018 Finite element analysis of aircraft wing using carbon fiber reinforced polymer and glass fiber reinforced
polymer IOP Conf. Series: Material science and Engineering (Kattankulathur)
[28] Holt P, Mundy P, Butchart D, Ledger J and Piper S 1994 The vultures of Africa. Academic Press, London: 1992 (originally published by
Acorn Books, Johannesburg: 1992). Pp 460; ISBN: 0-12-510585-1
[29] Agarwal B D and Broutman L W 1990 Analysis and performance of Fiber Composites 3rd edn (New York: NY: Wiley) pp 76–9
[30] Abaqus 6.14 user guide 2018 Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corp. [Online]. Available: https://sharcnet.ca/Software/Abaqus/6.14.2/v6.
14/books/usi/default.htm?startat=pt04ch31s02hlb04.html [Accessed 9 January]
[31] West System Inc. 2017 ‘Vacuum Bagging Techniques,’ West System Inc., Saturday April 2010. [Online]. Available: http://westsystem.
com/wp-content/uploads/VacuumBag-7th-Ed.pdf [Accessed 25 November]
[32] Li H, Wang J and Baker A 2012 Rapid composite bonded repair for helicopter tail drive shafts Composites: Part B 43 1579–85
[33] American Society for testing and materials 2006 Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matirx Composite Materials
(West Conshohocken: ASTM)

10