Composite Structures 93 (2011) 31753184

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Performance of bolted joints in Discontinuous Ceramic Cored Sandwich Structures Static experimental testing
Kristopher S. Weidner a,b,, John W. Gillespie Jr. a,b,c,1, Nicholas Shevchenko b
a

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA Center for Composite Materials, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA c Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA
b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
Thick section composites that consist of discontinuous ceramic tile arrays as a core represent a unique class of sandwich structures. They have been developed to provide a balance of structural, impact, and penetration resistance at minimum weight. Bolted joints are often used to fasten the Discontinuous Ceramic Cored Sandwich Structures (DCCSS) to other structures. Extensive experimental testing has been completed in order to better understand the performance of bolted joints in DCCSS. In this study, pinloaded specimens are subjected to static in-plane tensile loading to establish the sequence and severity of failure modes and ultimate joint capacity. Static testing was completed on various geometric ratios such as edge distance effects, as well as the inuence of tile gaps that exist in the discontinuous tile array. The results from this study establish guidelines for design of bolted joints in DCCSS. 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Available online 30 June 2011 Keywords: Discontinuous Joints Sandwich Failure Performance

1. Introduction Discontinuous Ceramic Cored Sandwich Structures (DCCSS) are a unique composite material. A schematic of the DCCSS is presented in Fig. 1 and consists of a discontinuous ceramic tile array bonded to two composite face sheets using an adhesive interlayer. This combination of materials has been shown to maximize impact and penetration resistance at minimal weight while providing a high level of structural performance [7,9]. The mechanics of DCCSS loaded in tension and bending have been studied by Hansen, Huang et al., Gawandi et al., Mahdi et al., and Alfreddson et al. using analytical, numerical, and experimental methods [1,57,9, 15,16]. These studies have provided insight into internal load paths, stress distributions and failure modes. However, joining methods for attaching DCCSS panels to other structures has not yet been investigated. Mechanically fastened joints in composite laminates are often the most common method for connecting structures despite the fact that bonded joints are more weight efcient. Mechanically fastened joints require minimal surface preparation and allows for easy installation, inspection, and repair. Despite the many benets that bolted joints provide, they also cause large stress concentrations that are the catalyst for failure modes. According to the DOD/NASA
Corresponding author at: 202 Composites Manufacturing Science Laboratory, Newark, DE 19716, USA. Tel.: +1 610 772 1738. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (K.S. Weidner), [email protected] (J.W. Gillespie Jr.). 1 Tel.: +1 302 831 8149.
0263-8223/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2011.06.012

Advanced Composite Design Guide the failure modes for bolted joints in advanced composites, such as the individual face sheet material, are bearing failure, net-tension failure, and shear-out failure [4]. Examples of these failure modes can be seen below in Fig. 2. A review written by Thoppul et al. has proven that the mechanics of mechanically fastened joints in thin polymer-matrix composite structures has been studied extensively. Detailed reports exist describing many factors relevant to bolted joint experimentation and analysis, however, a majority of these papers relate to thin laminates. These factors are directly addressed in ASTM Standard D5961 [21]. Despite having a large knowledge base about thin laminates, bolted joints in DCCSS are far more complicated due to overall thickness and the incorporation of discontinuous tiles that generate interlaminar stresses and unique failure modes such as tile cracking, debonding, and delamination near the tile gap. The effects of stress concentrations at the pin location cause complications, which can result in premature failure. Two sets of static tests were performed in this study. The rst was static testing on the face sheet material individually and the second was static testing on the DCCSS material. Testing the individual face sheet material provided data to better understand the structural benet of having the ceramic core and adhesive interlayer. It was determined that net-tension, bending/shear failure, bearing failure, and face sheet/interlayer bond line failure occurs sequentially before ultimate failure. Examples of these failure modes are shown in Fig. 3. The bending/shear failure mode form as a tensile crack that propagates in the load direction between the pin and sample edge (see Fig. 3, crack location 2).

3176

K.S. Weidner et al. / Composite Structures 93 (2011) 31753184

Fig. 1. Discontinuous Ceramic Cored Sandwich Structure (baseline top, pin on gap bottom).

Fig. 2. Face sheet failure modes.

2. Materials, machining, and fabrication DCCSS are fabricated from three separate parts. The constituents are the face sheet, the adhesive interlayer, and the discontinuous ceramic tile core. Material properties are listed in Table 1. The specimen is then infused with FCS-2 epoxy resin using the VARTM (Vacuum Assisted Resin Transfer Molding) process at room temperature followed by a two day room temperature cure under vacuum. After demolding the panel is post cured for a total of 10 h with an 8 h dwell at 149 C with an hour long ramp rates for heating and cooling. For the purpose of experimental testing mechanically fastened joints, the DCCSS being used contains two equal sized face sheets. This allows for a symmetric design, simplifying the experimental process. See Fig. 1 for dimensions of DCCSS. Each face sheet consists of two layers of 3-TEX 3Weave S-2 Glass 100 oz ZZ fabric. This fabric is considered a 3D woven structure that has bers woven in the x, y, and z directions [20]. The inplane tows are non-crimp and the warp direction (1 direction) is aligned with the load direction. The discontinuous tile core is comprised of thirty-six 101.6 mm wide by 101.6 mm long by 10.16 mm thick square FG-995 alumina ceramic tiles supplied by Coorstek. The ceramic tiles are placed in an aligned array for each of the

panels created. An adhesive interlayer is applied between the ceramic tiles and the face sheets, and has a thickness of .508 mm. Each panel that is created is approximately 609.6 mm by 609.6 with a total thickness of 23.87 mm. A water cooled table saw with a diamond tipped blade was used for machining DCCSS panels. This tool prevents the material from overheating and ensures that the diamond tipped blade cuts smoothly and cleanly through the material. A water cooled diamond tipped half inch core drill bit, purchased from Starlite Industries, Inc. was used for drilling all holes in the DCCSS panels. 3. Test procedure Throughout all experimental work proper test procedures were followed to ensure consistent experimentation, resulting in accurate data. Multiple joint congurations have been used throughout experimentation and can be seen below in Table 2. A minimum of three replicates per geometry were tested. Due to the brittle nature of the ceramic tile (see Table 1) a slow loading rate of 2.54 mm per minute was used. This loading rate was utilized for all specimens tested, including the face sheet specimens, to make sure all data was comparable. The slow loading rate

K.S. Weidner et al. / Composite Structures 93 (2011) 31753184

3177

Fig. 3. Failure modes of DCCSS.

Table 1 Inplane material properties. Material Ceramic tile Modulus/strength E = 344.7 GPa XT = 1.72 MPa XC = 17.4 MPa S12 = 124.1 MPa E = 0.489 GPa E1T = 22.4 GPa E2T = 23.03 GPa E3T = 11.72 GPa X1T = 479.87 MPa X2T = 601.22 MPa S3T = 8.34 MPa E1C = 25.23 GPa E2C = 21.24 GPa E3C = 12.34 GPa X1C = 270.27 MPa X2C = 212.36 MPa S3C = 299.92 MPa G12 = 2.89 GPa S12 = 37.71 MPa Poisson ratio Strain to failure n/a Thickness 10.16 mm

Table 2 Test matrix for static tests of face sheet and DCCSS (all dimensions in mm). Sample # FSW.625E2 FSW.75E2 FSW.875E2 FSW1E2 FSW2E2 FSW3E2 FSW4E2 FSW5E2 FSW4E1 FSW4E1.25 FSW4E1.5 FSW4E1.75 FSW4E2.25 FSW4E2.5 FSW4E3 DCW4E2 DCW4E1.5 DCW3E2 PGW4E2 PGW4E4 Width (w) 15.875 19.05 22.22 25.40 50.8 76.2 101.6 127 101.6 101.6 101.6 101.6 101.6 101.6 101.6 101.6 101.6 76.2 101.6 101.6 Edge distance (e) 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 25.4 31.75 38.1 44.45 57.15 63.5 76.2 50.8 38.1 50.8 50.8 101.6 Thickness (t) 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 5.48 23.876 23.876 23.876 23.876 23.876 w/D 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 4 6 8 10 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 8 8 e/D 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2.5 3 3.5 4.5 5 6 4 3 4 4 8

l = 0.22

Interlayer Face sheet

l = 0.35 l12 = 0.11 l21 = 0.10

eT = 320% e1T = 2.56% e2T = 2.84% e3T = 0.07% e1C = 1.02% e2C = 0.74% e3C = 2.44%
k12 = 4.89%

0.508 mm 6.35 mm

in the xture and the test machine itself. Below in Fig. 5 is an image showing the setup of a typical experiment. allows for thorough inspection of failure mode progression during testing. Throughout testing the specimens were visually monitored to determine the different failure modes, their locations, and at what load they occurred. Cracks were located using a blue dye and the progression at which they formed was noted. All geometries were compared to a baseline specimen. The baseline specimen was dened by the geometry where the pin bears directly in the geometric center of a ceramic tile. Each tile has dimensions of 101.6 mm 101.6 mm 10.16 mm. All variations in geometry were directly compared to the baseline specimen geometry. Having an understanding of how the failure modes behave in the baseline experiment provides an insight as to how varying geometries will behave under the same loading conditions. A double lap single pin joint conguration was used for all test procedures. These test procedures are based on the ASTM D5961 Bearing response of polymer matrix composite laminates and therefore this test xture was adapted and redesigned for our thicker specimens. The xture is constructed of 17-4PH stainless steel, which has high yield strength (1000 MPa). The dimensions of the test xture can be seen in Fig. 4. Deection during experimental testing is measured using LVDTs that are clamped to the specimen and the test xture. This minimizes error in the deection readings that would otherwise be caused by compliance 4. Bearing test of face sheet material and discontinuous ceramic cored sandwich structures As a rst step in understanding the failure modes, joint strength, and joint durability in DCCSS specimens, experimental testing was rst completed on the individual face sheet material. 4.1. Face sheet testing Bearing tests were completed for the individual face sheet with varying e/D and w/D ratios. These tests provide an indication of the load carrying capacity of mechanically fastened joints provided by the face sheet material. This gives an insight into the additional load carrying capacity of DCCSS after the ceramic tile fails. In order to complete experimentation a large test matrix of varying e/D and w/D ratios, while holding the pin diameter constant, was created. The geometries tested can be seen in Table 2. The most common failure modes to occur in the face sheet material are net tension, shear-out, and bearing failure. Examples of these failure modes can be seen in Fig. 2. The bearing stresses and displacements at which the different failure modes occurred can be seen in Table 3 below.

3178

K.S. Weidner et al. / Composite Structures 93 (2011) 31753184 Table 3 Face sheet bearing stress and displacement at failure. Failure mode Net tension Shear-out Specimens FSW.625E2 FSW.75E2 FSW4E1 FSW4E1.25 FSW4E1.5 FSW4E1.75 to FSW4E3 e/D 4 4 2 2.5 3 3.5 to 6 w/D 1.25 1.5 8 8 8 8 Bearing stress 140 MPa 250 MPa 200 MPa 250 MPa 275 MPa 325 MPa Displacement 1.27 mm 2.032 mm .762 mm .762 mm .762 mm .762 mm

Bearing

According to Fig. 6 a transition from shear-out failure to bearing failure occurs when the e/D > 3.5 (w/D is held constant at 8). Fig. 7 shows a transition from net tension failure to bearing failure when w/D > 2.2 (e/D is held constant at 4). Understanding the bearing strength in the face sheet individually establishes a baseline for assessing the bolted joint behavior of the DCCSS as a multilayer material. 4.2. Discontinuous ceramic cored sandwich structure testing Static tensile bearing tests were performed to better understand the bearing performance of the DCCSS. Testing provides insight to the strength and stiffness of mechanically fastened joints. Testing joints in DCCSS allows for the many different types of failure modes to be classied, providing details on when and where they occur. Comparing Fig. 2 to Fig. 3 the difference between failure modes of the individual face sheet to the DCCSS is apparent. Multiple DCCSS geometric ratios were tested (Table 2). These ratios include the baseline geometry, a decreased edge distance, and a decreased width. Two pin on tile gap geometries were also tested. The rst DCCSS geometry that was tested is considered the baseline specimen. This specimen has a width of 101.6 mm and an edge distance of 50.8 mm resulting in a w/D = 8 and the e/D = 4. As the specimen is monotonically loaded, unique failure modes occur sequentially. The response for three replicates is shown in Fig. 8. Overall the behavior is quite repeatable in terms of the overall stress-deformation response and a signicant amount of structural ductility due to progressive damage and load path redundancy is observed (ultimate failure occurs at a displacement that is 810 times greater than rst damage in the ceramic). Pictures of these failure modes are shown in Fig. 3 and the associated bearing stress and displacement for each failure mode is given in Table 4. The rst failure mode that occurs is net tension failure in the ceramic tile (crack location 1 in Fig. 3). This failure mode is caused by the low tensile strain to failure of the ceramic tiles. This crack initiates at the edge of the hole and propagates at very high crack speed across the width of the specimen. This crack does not cause catastrophic failure as the tile loads are transferred to the face sheets by the interlayer. This interaction is analogous to the load transfer mechanisms studied by Mahdi [16] that exist at the tile gaps that exist in the DCCSS. The second failure mode to occur is designated by the bending/ shear failure mode (crack location 2 in Fig. 3). This crack propagates at very high crack speeds in the ceramic in the load direction and extends between the pin and the specimen edge. It is not possible to witness the initiation site for the crack during the test. However, tensile stress normal to the crack exists at the edge and pin locations. The crack does propagate in a self similar direction indicating that the crack is dominated by the tensile stress component across the width of the specimen. This second major crack does not cause catastrophic failure of the specimen as the interlayer is effective in transferring load to the face sheets along the length of the crack. However, this damage mode does correspond to the onset of nonlinear stress-deformation response (see

Fig. 4. Fixture dimensions.

Design charts were created based on the variations in the e/D and w/D ratios. The design curves provide bearing stress vs. geometric ratio. The different types of failure modes that occurred during testing are also labeled on each chart. The design charts for face sheet material with variations in both e/D and w/D can be seen below in Figs. 6 and 7.

Fig. 5. Experimental setup.

K.S. Weidner et al. / Composite Structures 93 (2011) 31753184

3179

Fig. 6. Face sheet design chart (e/D ratio).

Fig. 7. Face sheet design chart (w/D ratio).

Fig. 8). It is likely that the compliant interlayer is undergoing local plastic deformation at these crack locations and contributing to the nonlinear response. The next failure mode to occur is bearing failure in the face sheet. At this point, the bending/shear crack in the tile and interlayer yielding has reduced the contribution of the tile to carry compressive bearing loads. Bearing stresses in the face sheet increase and initiate bearing failure modes similar to the results shown in Fig. 2. This failure mode does not cause catastrophic failure as continued loading exhibits a plateau bearing stress level and additional pin deformation. This is attributed to the high strain to failure of the interlayer (320%) used in this study. Catastrophic failure occurs when the interlayer fails by complete debonding of the face sheets from the ceramic tiles. At this point, the tiles do not carry any of the applied load and the face sheets are overloaded in bearing. The hole elongates signicantly and the two major pieces of cracked tiles are pushed out the end of the specimen. These failure modes are clearly evident in Fig. 3. Analogous to the face sheet testing, the effects of w/D and e/D are studied where the pin is located along the tile centerline. Since the rst failure mode is net-tension, the effects of w/D are tested

rst. As a result of the discontinuous tile array, only two w/D variations were tested, w/D = 8 and w/D = 6. The discontinuous tile array prevents larger w/D ratios from being tested without involving additional tile gap interactions across the width. It has been determined that due to the brittle nature and low tensile strength of the ceramic tile the results were insensitive to variations in w/D over the range studied. For geometric reasons, w/D = 8 is a practical lower limit for bolted joint assemblies. It was also previously concluded that any w/D = 2.5 or over is sufcient to induce bearing failure in the face sheet alone. Therefore in w/D = 8 DCCSS, this bearing failure in the face sheet will occur. Based on the face sheet testing, the bending/shear, bearing face sheet and catastrophic failure in DCCSS are expected to show greater sensitivity to e/D ratios. At larger pin displacements, approaching catastrophic failure, the interlayer yields over the entire shear area. In this regime, reducing e/D reduces the shear area. As a result the larger e/D and shear area increases the strength of the joint. This can be seen in Fig. 9, where an increase in edge distance results in higher stresses between the onset of failure (bending/shear) to ultimate failure. Small increases in the e/D result in large increases in the stress at ultimate failure. Comparisons

3180

K.S. Weidner et al. / Composite Structures 93 (2011) 31753184

Fig. 8. Baseline DCCSS bearing stress vs. displacement.

Table 4 DCCSS bearing stress/displacement at failure for baseline geometry (w/D = 8, e/D = 4). Failure mode Net tension Bending/shear Ultimate failure Bearing stress at failure (MPa) 58.7 352 488.5 Displacement (mm) .25 1.01.7 1.71.8

Much like the w/D ratio, the discontinuous tile array was a limiting factor on how large the e/D could be (see Fig. 10). The pin, when located directly on a gap in the ceramic tiles, resulted in the largest possible e/D ratio with this tile array (e/D = 8) and maximized the available interlayer shear area. 4.3. Pin on gap specimen testing Placement of the hole in the tile is an important design variable. In the baseline (w/D = 8, e/D = 4) tests above, the pin was placed at the location where the stress concentrations associated with the pin loading are as far as possible from the stress concentrations that exist as a result of the tile gaps. Moving the pin closer to the tile gaps (i.e. increasing e/D) resulted in an increase in shear area

between the baseline (w/D = 8, e/D = 4), reduced width (w/D = 6, e/ D = 4), and reduced edge distance (w/D = 8, e/D = 3) can be seen in Fig. 9. This gure clearly shows how changes in width show little change, while a increase in the edge distance shows a signicant increase in joint strength of approximately 40%.

Fig. 9. Bearing stress vs. displacement (pin on tile geometry comparison).

K.S. Weidner et al. / Composite Structures 93 (2011) 31753184

3181

Fig. 10. Baseline and pin on gap DCCSS Schematics (e/D = 4, P.O.G. e/D = 4, e/D = 8).

and ultimate load. The geometric maximum limit for e/D in the DCCSS specimen is the placement of the pin on the tile gap (e/ D = 8). In the pin on gap specimen testing, the interactions of both stress concentrations are studied by placing the hole at the ceramic tile gap location. Two pin on gap congurations were tested to understand whether the benets were a result of only the increased shear area or also in part due to the pin bearing directly on the tile edge at the gap. These two congurations were pin on gap w/D = 8, e/D = 4 and pin on gap w/D = 8, and e/D = 8. These congurations can be seen above in Fig. 10. The pin on gap w/D = 8, e/D = 4 conguration was tested rst. This conguration has the same ratios as the standard baseline specimen with the pin located in the center of the tile. The only difference is that the pin in this case was located directly over a gap in the ceramic tiles. The net-tension failure mode is essentially eliminated since the tile gap is already present at this location throughout DCCSS. This increases the durability of the structure under low loads signicantly. The remaining failure modes occurred similarly to the baseline specimen, resulting in almost identical ultimate failures. It was determined from these tests that the pin on gap geometry helps to reduce damaging failure modes to the ceramic tile while maintaining the ultimate strength of the joint. This is important for the multi-functionality of the DCCSS. As a second test, the e/D was increased to 8 keeping the pin located directly over the gap region. This geometry can be seen in Fig. 10. The benets of locating the pin on gap is already understood. The purpose of this test is to determine whether increasing the edge distance (i.e. shear area) will increase the strength of the joint much like decreasing the edge distance decreased the strength of the joint. Fig. 11 shows the comparison bearing stress vs. displacement for the baseline specimens vs. the pin on gap specimens. The pin on gap specimen with a w/D = 8 and an e/ D = 8 are tted with a RambergOsgood line t to show that the maximum stress achieved was approaching the plateau stress. The RambergOsgood t establishes the plateau stress in the range of 700780 MPa. This proves that the ultimate strength of the pin on gap joint with an e/D = 8 is approximately a 60% increase compared to the baseline specimen with e/D = 4. As a result of the pin on gap with an e/D = 8 this geometry shows a greater resistance to damaging failure modes at lower stress levels and an increased strength. This geometry was not subject to tile damage until stresses approaching the plateau stress, 586689 MPa. This dam-

age is not considered a net tension failure, however it also did not shear out the ceramic pieces within the specimen like the other bending/shear failure modes. This failure took a different path, but inspection after testing showed that the crack originated at the hole location similarly to other bending/shear failure modes. Table 5 below shows the bearing stresses at each failure mode, ultimate failure, and displacement at failure for baseline and pin on gap specimens. 5. Discussion It is important to remember that the DCCSS material must provide penetration resistance, structural strength, and bolted joint strength. In some cases the face sheet material alone may structurally out-perform the DCCSS material, however it cannot provide the necessary penetration resistance. It is still important to understand how the individual face sheet material and the DCCSS composite behaves separately. As the DCCSS fails, more load is transferred to the face sheet itself, until all the load is being transferred directly through the face sheet. At this point the overall geometry of the specimen will determine whether the entire structure fails. This is where the face sheet design charts play an important role. Based on these charts it is known that at w/D > 2.5 and e/ D > 3.5 slow bearing failure will occur, however if you go below those ratios, more catastrophic net tension or shear-out failures will occur in the individual face sheet material. Charts were created in Figs. 12 and 13 to compare DCCSS bearing stresses at failure to individual face sheet bearing stresses at failure. Fig. 12 shows how holding the e/D = 4 constant and varying w/D affects the failure modes and bearing stresses while Fig. 13 shows how keeping the w/D = 8 constant while varying e/D affects the failure modes and bearing stresses. It is important to take bearing stresses at which failures occur in the individual materials into account during design as well as the entire DCCSS structure. Fig. 12 provides data describing how changes in w/D affect the bearing stress for individual face sheet materials and DCCSS when e/D is held constant at 4. From this differences between failure modes in the individual face sheet material and the DCCSS can easily be compared. This also shows how variations in width for the pin on ceramic tile specimens did not affect the strength of the joint. Fig. 13 compares the bearing stress for varying e/D ratios for the individual face sheet material and DCCSS when the w/D is held constant at 8. Based on study described in this paper it is

3182

K.S. Weidner et al. / Composite Structures 93 (2011) 31753184

Fig. 11. Bearing stress vs. displacement (baseline e/D = 4, pin on gap e/D = 4, pin on gap e/D = 8, pin on gap RambergOsgood line t).

Table 5 Baseline, pin on gap bearing stress and displacement at failure. Specimen Baseline Pin on gap (e/D = 4) Pin on gap (e/D = 8) Gap failure (MPa) n/a 5873 7388 Net tension (MPa) 4778 n/a n/a Bending/shear (MPa) 302396 293367 586689 Ultimate (MPa) 478509 462472 Plateau n/a 700780 Displacement (mm) 44.5 4.34.4 n/a

Fig. 12. Combined design chart with varying w/D and e/D = 4.

understood that variations in the e/D can greatly affect the overall strength of a joint in these materials. The chart in Fig. 13 clearly shows that utilizing pin on gap joints with an e/D = 8 have the highest strength. The peak stress for these specimens are the plateau stress based off of the RambergOsgood plateau bearing stress

plots, which can be seen in Fig. 11. When comparing both design charts it can be determined under static loading conditions that the joint conguration with maximum strength corresponds to the pin on gap with the e/D = 8 and w/D = 8. It is recommended to use this joint conguration whenever possible, however,

K.S. Weidner et al. / Composite Structures 93 (2011) 31753184

3183

Fig. 13. Combined design chart with varying e/D and w/D = 8.

geometric limitations can prevent this and should be designed accordingly. 6. Conclusions/recommendations Discontinuous Ceramic Cored Sandwich Structures are a versatile composite materials with high penetration resistance and structural strength. This paper describes an experimental investigation to determine the performance of joints in DCCSS using a double lab, single pin joint conguration. Tests were conducted varying the e/D and w/D ratios in both individual face sheet and DCCSS materials. It has been determined that the inclusion of the stiff ceramic tile as a core increases the ultimate bearing capacity for bolted joints. It has also been determined that the DCCSS material is very sensitive to edge distance, i.e. decrease in edge distance equals a decrease in strength and an increase in edge distance equals and increase in strength, and should be taken into account during design. Variations in the edge distance can drastically affect the failure modes and ultimate strength of the joint. Locating the pin directly over the discontinuities in the ceramic tile array has proven benecial for joints by reducing tensile failure modes in the early stages of loading. The minimization of failure modes helps to preserve the impact resistance of the structure. The most efcient conguration to be found during experimentation is a pin on gap specimen with an e/D = 8 and w/D = 8. The pin on gap geometry helps to minimize failure modes while the increased edge distance extends the ultimate bearing capacity of the joint. This allows the ceramic tile to be intact and enables it to perform at optimum levels for structural and penetration resistance applications. This joint conguration is recommended to be used in Discontinuous Ceramic Cored Sandwich Structures whenever possible. Discontinuous Ceramic Cored Sandwich Structures will likely be used in situations that undergo cyclic loading. Further testing needs to be performed to assess the durability of DCCSS. Tensiontension fatigue testing will be completed using an identical test setup as static testing discussed in this report. References
[1] Alfredsson KS, Gillespie Jr JW, Carlsson LA, Bogetti TA, Yiournas A. Flexure analysis of unsymmetric orthotropic beams with an interlayer. Int J Solids Struct 2009;46(10):2093110. [4] DOD/NASA Advanced Composites Design Guide. 1.3.2 Mechanically Fastened Joints. 1. 1 Design. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base: Structures/Dynamics Division, Flight Dynamics Laboratory, 1983. Print. [5] Gawandi A, Gillespie Jr JW. Experimental investigation of interface failure in a discontinuous sandwich structure. In: Proceedings of american society for

[6]

[7]

[9]

[15] [16]

[20] [21]

composites, 22nd annual technical conference, September 1719, Seattle, Washington; 2007. Gawandi Anis, Carlsson Leif A, Bogetti Travis A, Gillespie Jr John W. Mechanics of discontinuous ceramic core sandwich structure: inuence of thermal and interlaminar stresses. Compos Struct 2010;92:16472 [Web. 17 July 2010]. Gillespie Jr JW, Hansen U. Transverse cracking of composite laminates with interleaves: a variational approach. J Reinf Plast Compos 1997;16(12):106692. Huang XG, Gillespie Jr JW, Kumar V, Gavin L. Mechanics of integral armor: discontinuous ceramic-cored sandwich structure under tension and shear. Compos Struct 1996;36:8190 [Web. 5 January 2010]. Mahdi S, Gama BA, Yarlagadda S, Gillespie Jr JW. Structural repair of composite structural armor. J Compos Mater 2005;39(19):1695717. Mahdi S, Gillespie Jr JW. Finite element analysis of tile-reinforced composite structural armor subjected to bending loads. Compos Part B: Eng 2004;35:5771. S-Glass Fabrics. 3TEX Incorporated 3TEX, Inc.; 2007. <http://www.3tex.com/ node/22> [Web. 6 July 2010]. Standard Test Method for Bearing Response of Polymer Matrix Composite Laminates. D 5961/D 5961 M 05. West Conshohocken: ASTM International; 2005.

Further reading
[2] Alfredsson KS, Bogetti TA, Carlsson LA, Gillespie Jr JW, Yiournas A. Flexure of beams with interlayer symmetric beams with orthotropic adherends. J Mech Mater Struct 2008;3(1):4562. [3] Cooper C, Turvey GJ. Effects of joint geometry and bolt torque on the structural performance of single bolt tension joints in pultruded GRP sheet material. Compos Struct 1995;32:21726 [Web.17 June 2009]. [8] Li Hou, Liu Dashin. Size effects and thickness constraints in composite joints. J Compos Mater 2003;37.2 [Web. 21 December 2009]. [10] Khashaba UA, Sallam HEM, Al-Shorbagy AE, Seif MA. Effect of washer size and tightening torque on the performance of bolted joints in composite structures. Compos Struct 2006;73:3107 [Web. 11 January 2010]. [11] Lawlor VP, McCarthy MA, Stanley WF. An experimental study of bolt-hole clearance effects in double-lap, multi-bolt composite joints. Compos Struct 2005;71:17690 [Web. 14 January 2010]. [12] Lawlor VP, Stanley WF, McCarthy MA. Characterization of damage development in single-shear bolted composite joints. J Plast, Rubber, Compos 2002;31.3:12633 [Web. 17 January 2010]. [13] Li R, Huong N, Crosky A, Mouritz AP, Kelly D. Improving bearing performance of composite bolted joints using z-pins. Composite Science and Technology 2009;69:8839 [Web. 5 January 2010]. [14] Liu Dahsin, Raju Basavaraju B, You Junling. Thickness Effects on Pinned Joints for Composites. J Compos Mater 1999:3 [Web. 21 December 2009]. [17] Mahdi S, Gama BA, Yarlagadda S, Gillespie Jr JW. Effect of the manufacturing process on the interfacial properties and structural performance of multifunctional composite structures. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf 2003;34(7):561686. [18] McCarthy MA, Lawlor VP, Stanley WF, McCarthy CT. Bolt-hole clearance effects and strength criteria in single-bolt single-lap, composite bolted joints. Compos Sci Technol 2002;62:141531 [Web. 14 January 2010]. [19] Ogonowski JM. Effect of variances and manufacturing tolerances on the design strength and life of mechanically fastened composite joints, vol. 3. St. Louis: McDonnell Aircraft Company; 1981. p. 146. [22] Starikov Roman, Joakim Schon. Experimental study on fatigue resistance of composite joints with protruding-head bolts. Compos Struct 2002;55:111 [Web. 5 January 2010].

3184

K.S. Weidner et al. / Composite Structures 93 (2011) 31753184 [26] Zabihpoor Mahmood, Moslemian Ramin, Afshin Mehdi, Nazemi Mohammad Hassan. Failure analysis of bolted joints in foam-core sandwich composites. J Reinf Plast Compos 2008;27.15:163547 [Web. 11 January 2010]. [27] Zhang Jin Min. Design and analysis of mechanically fastened composite joints and repairs. Eng Anal Boundary Elem 2001;25:43141 [Web. 17 December 2009].

[23] Thoppul Srinivasa, Finegan Joana, Gibson Ronald. Mechanics of mechanically fastened joints in polymer-matrix composite structures a review. Compos Sci Technol 2009;69:30129 [Web. 17 December 2009]. [24] Wang J, Bandbury A, Kelly DW. Evaluation of approaches for determining design allowables for bolted joints in laminated composites. Compos Struct 1998;41:16776 [Web. 17 December 2009]. [25] Xiao Yi, Ishikawa Takashi. Bearing strength and failure behavior of bolted composite joints (part I: experimental investigation). Compos Sci Technol 2005;65:102231 [Web. 11 January 2010].