COMPOSITES

SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY
Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958
www.elsevier.com/locate/compscitech

Modelling single and double-lap repairs on composite materials

R.D.S.G. Campilho a, M.F.S.F. de Moura a,*
, J.J.M.S. Domingues b

a
Departamento de Engenharia Mecânica e Gestão Industrial, Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto,
Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, s/n 4200-465 Porto, Portugal
b
Departamento de Engenharia Mecânica, Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto Rua Dr. António Bernardino
de Almeida, 431, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal

Received 3 February 2005

Available online 4 June 2005

Abstract

The present work is dedicated to the study of single and double-lap repairs on composite materials, using the ABAQUSÒ soft-
ware and special developed interface finite elements including a cohesive mixed-mode damage model based on the indirect use of
Fracture Mechanics. The objectives of this work are to evaluate the stress distributions and the residual strength under tensile load-
ing of a repaired composite plate. It was verified that the main parameters concerning the good performance of the repair are the
specimen geometry, stacking sequence and patch thickness. The numerical model allowed the simulation of damage initiation and
growth. Different kinds of failure modes of these joints were observed. The influence of the properties of the layers and of the adher-
end/adhesive, as well as adhesive/patch interfaces in the damage modes was also evaluated. One of the main findings is related to the
important influence that the strengths of the adhesives have on the failure mode, whilst adhesive and interface fracture toughness
present a little influence on this phenomenon. Some conclusions were drawn about design guidelines of composite repairs.
Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: A. Adhesive joints; B. Fracture; C. Laminates; C. Finite element analysis; Composite repair

1. Introduction culties, it is more ecologically efficient to repair the

The use of fibre reinforced composites has been
increasing in industry, specially the aeronautical indus-
try, because of its excellent characteristics of specific
strength and stiffness. They present, however, high sus-
ceptibility to low velocity impact damage, which can oc-
cur during the life of any kind of composite structure.
The accidental strikes by a tool or a bird in an airplane
wing are examples of these events. It is then important
to be able to detect the defects and to take the proper
repairing actions once they can substantially reduce
the residual strength. Moreover, due to recycling diffi-
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +351 225081727; fax:
225081584.
E-mail address: mfmoura@fe.up.pt (M.F.S.F. de Moura).
structures instead of replacing them.
The repair of composite structures with composite
patches may use several techniques, such as mechani-
cal fastening or adhesive bonding. Mechanical fasten-
ing often introduces stress concentrations in the
contact area between the fastener and the composite,
limiting the residual strength of the repaired plate.
Adhesive bonding is one of most common repair tech-
niques carried out in composite structures, either in
the condition of temporary repair or permanent re-
pair. As a temporary repair, it has the advantage of
its easy application process especially when it is an
external bonded repair. The repair procedure for this
method is as follows: the damaged area is removed
+351
by cutting a circular hole in the plate, and then the
hole is cleaned and a circular patch applied. This kind
of repair is temporary, being also used as a permanent

0266-3538/$ - see front matter Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.04.007
 R.D.S.G. Campilho et al. / Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958
repair for lightly loaded and low responsibility struc-
tures. The use of flush patch repairs, in which the
patches are placed inside the hole created by the re-
moval of the damaged area, is more structurally effi-
cient but also more expensive and time consuming.
In all of these types of repairs the main concerns
are the prediction of the residual strength of the ini-
tially damaged plate and the durability of the repaired
laminate. In fact, adhesive bonds require only minimal
design to achieve substantial strengths, but require
meticulous attention to produce durable and long last-
ing repaired joints [1]. Hu and Soutis [2] studied this
issue for compression loaded GFRP laminates, using
two and three-dimensional finite element models to
identify critical stress areas, using then a fracture
mechanics based criterion to predict the repaired lam-
inateÕs strength. This subject was also studied by Sou-
tis and Duan [3], being used a three-dimensional
model of a centred-hole and compression loaded lam-
inate to predict the potential failure initiating areas. It
was found and experimentally proved that failure
initiates with patch debonding followed by 00 fibres
micro-buckling. Other authors, like Reis and Antunes
[4], considered a similar situation, but using single-lap
tensile loaded joints. In this case, a two-dimensional
finite element model was used and it was analysed
mainly the influence of the overlap length on the
jointÕs failure and on the stress concentration areas.
Yang and Huang [5] have followed a different proce-
dure: an analytical model based on the Laminated
Anisotropic Plate Theory was developed to obtain
the stress distribution in a single-lap joint. Afterwards,
results were compared with a two-dimensional numer-
ical model for validation. In order to reduce peak
stresses and improve joint strength, Ganesh and Choo
[6] obtained numerically, and experimentally validated,
a concept that uses adherend modulus grading, i.e.,
with spatial varying properties, in order to increase
joint strength. For this purpose, eight-noded and
plane strain isoparametric elements were used. Some
authors, like Odi and Friend [7] focused on comparing
the different approaches that have been used in the
last few years concerning the use of the finite element
method to predict bonded jointÕs strength, namely Si-
enerÕs model and BairÕs model, among others. Chan
and Vedhagiri [8] compared numerical and experimen-
tal results for bonded, bolted and bonded/bolted
joints. For the three-dimensional models they used
non-linear contact elements as gap elements to model
the hole/pin interface and the interface between the
parent and repair laminates. Charalambides and Kin-
loch [9] used a finite element analysis package to
determine failure criteria which would predict the
experimentally observed failure paths and strength of
the adhesively bonded repair joints. Oztelcan and
Ochoa [10] applied a finite element model using a user
1949
routine based on the ultimate stress, allowing detect-
ing damage initiation and progression in the adhesive
of overlap and scarf repaired joints. Mahdi and Kin-
loch [11] used two-dimensional and quasi three-dimen-
sional finite element models to predict the
performance of undamaged and also of overlap and
scarf repaired beams. The two-dimensional model
was found to describe the repaired geometries quite
accurately and was considered suitable to qualitatively
design the repair patches. Odi and Friend [12] devel-
oped a new two-dimensional plane stress approach
which allows ply-by-ply modelling of composite adher-
ends in a joint. Scarf repaired and tensile loaded joints
were modelled and its ultimate failure load predicted.
The work in this paper is dedicated to the study of
single and double-lap repairs (Fig. 1) in tensile loaded
composite structures reinforced with carbon fibres,
using the commercial software ABAQUSÒ. The objec-
tive of the simulations is to obtain stress distributions
and to evaluate the residual strength of the repaired
plates, as well as to assess the effect of geometric changes
in the plates and patches on the residual strength. The
main goal is to optimize the referred geometries in order
to achieve the maximum residual strength.
2. Stress analysis
The presented work consists of a two-dimensional
non-linear material and geometrical analysis, consider-
ing plane strain conditions and rectangular 8-node finite
elements. Two different situations were simulated: single
and double-lap joints (Fig. 1). The plates and patches
are made of carbon-epoxy composite, whose mechanical
properties are presented in Table 1. Stress analyses were
performed considering unidirectional and load oriented
laminates. Table 2 shows the plates and patches
geometry.
The main objective is to obtain the geometrical
parameters that allow minimizing the stress concentra-
tions after repair, for both the configurations presented
in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Single-lap and double-lap joints.
1950 R.D.S.G. Campilho et al. / Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958

Table 1
Mechanical properties of the plates and patches
Plates and patches Adhesive (AralditeÒ 420 A/B)
Elastic property Plastic property
E1 = 1.09E + 05 MPa m12 = 0.342 G12 = 4315 MPa re = 12.7 MPa rs = 16.7 MPa
E2 = 8819 MPa m13 = 0.342 G13 = 4315 MPa E = 4 GPa es = 0.1
E3 = 8819 MPa m23 = 0.380 G23 = 3200 MPa m = 0.35

Table 2 cause delamination between adjacent layers of the

Plates and patches geometry
Plates Patches
Width: w = 25 mm Thickness: tr = 2 mm
Thickness: tp = 4 mm Overlap length: L = 15 mm
Spacing between plates: e = 5 mm
re of a 00 layer: 1.3 GPa
2.1. Single-lap joints
2.1.1. Stress distributions
The results initially obtained shown that the repaired
composite is subjected to a combination of tensile and
bending loads. The bending component is caused by
the eccentricity of the loads transmitted between the
plates and patch. This bending phenomenon is responsi-
ble for stress concentrations at the lower half of the
patch, where the tensile and bending stresses add each
other (Fig. 2). It has also been noticed that the failure
of the joint occurs at the adhesive.
Fig. 3 compares, at the elastic limit of the joint, the
peel stresses at five different locations in the joint: the
interface between the two adherends layers closest to
the adhesive (P1), the adherend/adhesive interface
(P2), the middle of the adhesive (P3), the adhesive/patch
interface (P4) and the interface between the two patches
layer closest to the adhesive (P5). In all cases, it can be
observed that it exist two peaks of peel stresses at the
extremities of the overlaps. Comparing these stresses,
it can be found that these peaks are higher in the adhe-
sive/adherend and adhesive/patch interfaces, which may
plates. As it can be easily seen from Fig. 3, for similar
strength properties of the plates, adhesive and patch in
the thickness direction, failure is prone to occur at or
near to the interfaces mentioned above.
Comparing the shear stress distributions at the elastic
limit of the joint and at the same locations as in Fig. 3,
two peak stresses are also present at the ends of the
overlap length (Fig. 4). Among the shear stress distribu-
tions at the five locations, the higher values are found to
be in the adhesive/adherend and adhesive/patch inter-
faces. This reinforces the idea that, for similar interlam-
inar strength properties of the plates, adhesive and
patch, the joint failure will probably occur at or near
the referred interfaces.
2.1.2. Overlap length
One of the most important parameters that influences
the joint residual strength is the overlap length. The re-
mote failure stress (rC) is defined by the ratio between
the applied load at the elastic limit of the adhesive and
the platesÕ sectional area. From Fig. 5, it can be ob-
served that rC does not increase in proportion with
the overlap length. The increase of the remote failure
stress is higher for the smallest overlap lengths, decreas-
ing for overlaps higher than 15 mm. This behaviour is
explained by the shear stress distribution at the adhesive
(Fig. 6) since, as the overlap length increases, the inner
region of the adhesive becomes unloaded. Fig. 5 also
presents the per cent raise on the failure stress (DrC)
and the efficiency of the repaired joint (g), in function
of the overlap length. The joint efficiency is considered
to be the quotient between the remote failure stress
(rC) after repair and the remote failure stress of an
undamaged plate.

2.1.3. Patch thickness

Fig. 2. Normal stress distribution (rx) under tensile loading (single-lap
joint).
Analysing the effect of the patch thickness, it is no-
ticed that this parameter does not alter the remote fail-
ure stress of the joint, because failure occurs at the
adhesive. Obviously, the increase of the patch thickness
improves the joint stiffness and, consequently, dimin-
ishes the joint deformability. On the other hand, it was
observed that by increasing the patch thickness, even
though there is no change in the joint strength, the peel
peak stresses near the joint centre increases of a non-
 R.D.S.G. Campilho et al. / Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958 1951

Fig. 3. Comparison between the peel stress distributions at different locations.

Fig. 4. Comparison between the shear stresses distributions at different locations (same as in Fig. 3).

negligible amount (Fig. 7). This change in the peel stress
distribution may be responsible for delaminations be-
tween layers in the plates.
2.2. Double-lap joints
2.2.1. Stress distributions
As it can be seen in Fig. 8, the bending phenomenon,
observed in single-lap joints, no longer exists in the dou-
ble-lap configuration. In fact, it is observed an increase
on the joint strength higher than 100%, comparing this
joint with a single-lap one (see the respective remote fail-
ure stresses in Figs. 5 and 9). The main reason for this is
the doubling of the overlap area and the non-existence
of bending phenomenon (Fig. 8).
The peel stress distribution presents different peaks
(tensile and compressive) at the edges of the overlap
length (Fig. 10). This can be explained by the absence
1952 R.D.S.G. Campilho et al. / Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958

14 30
σC
12 ∆σC 25

10 η

∆σC [%], η [0/00]

20
σC [MPa]

8
15
6

10
4

5
2

Fig. 8. Normal stress distribution (rx) under tensile loading (double-

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 lap joint).
L [mm]

Fig. 5. Influence of the overlap length on the remote failure stress

(single-lap joints). 60 80

50 σC 70

∆σC 60

9 5mm 10mm
40

∆σC [%], η [0/00]

η 50

σC [MPa]
15mm 20mm
8
30 40
25mm 30mm
7
30
35mm 40mm 20
6
45mm 20
τxy/τavg

5 10
10

4
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
3
L [mm]
2
Fig. 9. Influence of the overlap length on the remote failure stress,
1
considering elastic behaviour (double-lap joints).
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
L [mm]

Fig. 6. Shear stress distribution at the adhesive for different values of

overlap length (single-lap joint).

2.5

tr/tp=33%
2
tr/tp=67%

1.5
σy/τavg

0.5

0
-0.3 -0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 Fig. 10. Peel stress distributions for two patch thicknesses in both
single-lap (SL) and double-lap (DL) joints.
-0.5
x/L

Fig. 7. Influence of the patch thickness on peel stress distributions in

2.2.2. Overlap length
the plates (single-lap joints).
Fig. 9 presents rC, DrC and g, in function of the over-
lap length, considering linear elastic behaviour. This re-
of the bending phenomenon observed with single-lap sult shows that there is no need in increasing the overlap
joints. The compressive peel peak stresses, closest to length above a certain value, once no important gain in
the centre of the joint, eliminates the delamination ten- the joint strength is observed. After this limit value, the
dency existent in single-lap joints, which is an increase of the joint strength in function of the overlap
advantage. length is less pronounced. This situation is justified by
 R.D.S.G. Campilho et al. / Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958 1953

4 50 3000
5mm 10mm
3.5 2500
15mm 20mm
40

3 25mm 30mm
2000
35mm 40mm

σR [MPa]
30
2.5

σC [MPa]
45mm σC 1500
τxy/τavg

2
20
Ref. [2]
1000
1.5
σR
10
1 500

0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
L [mm]
Fig. 11. Shear stress distribution at the adhesive for different values of
overlap length (double-lap joint).
the shear stress distribution in the adhesive. In fact, as
verified for single-lap repairs, from a certain overlap
length the intermediate zone of the adhesive is practi-
cally not loaded. Fig. 11 shows the shear stress distribu-
tion at the adhesive for different values of overlap
length.
With a similar analysis, but considering plastic
behaviour of the adhesive, the joint remote failure stress
increases proportionally with the overlap length. An effi-
ciency of almost 20% is obtained for a joint with an
overlap length of 45 mm (Fig. 12).
2.2.3. Patch thickness
The effect of the patch thickness on the remote failure
stress showed similar results to those obtained for single-
lap joints. In fact, the joint strength does not depend on
the patch thickness because the joint failure occurs at
the adhesive. However, for high values of patch thick-
ness (close to the plates thickness), it is observed that
the peel stresses are high enough to induce delamination
of adjacent layers of the plates before shear failure in the
adhesive takes place, which limits even more the re-
paired joint strength (Fig. 13). In these cases, it is ob-
300
σC
250
∆σC
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
40 45 50
2tr Er /(tp Ep )
Fig. 13. Influence of the patch stiffness on rC, considering elastic
behaviour.
served a reduction of rC due to the change in the
failure mechanism. Obviously, for the thinnest patches,
the failure mechanism in the joint will no longer happen
at the adhesive, but will occur by tensile stress failure at
the patch (when the patch tensile stress exceeds the limit
value of 1300 MPa). Fig. 13 presents the patch tensile
stress along the load direction (rR), the remote failure
stress obtained in this work (rC), and the one presented
by Hu and Soutis [2] in function of the normalized patch
stiffness. The results presented at [2] refer to a similar sit-
uation, but considering a glass–fibre composite and a
compressive load. The different behaviour obtained by
these authors can be explained by the lower compressive
strength of glass–fibre patches, relatively to the tensile
strength of carbon–fibre ones.
3. Joints efficiency
3.1. Stacking sequences
The efficiency of the bonded double-lap joint can be
seen in Fig. 14(a), considering seven distinct stacking se-
quences of the plates presented in Table 3, a unidirec-
tional patch (016) and optimized joint (considering the
200 optimum parameters studied before). The Tsai-Hill cri-
180 terion was used to evaluate the strength properties of
160 the undamaged plates. Joint elastic failure (EF) and
140 plastic failure (PF) were considered in the analyses. It
∆σC [%], η [0/00]

200 η
120 is also presented, for each case, the necessary overlap
σC [MPa]

150 100 length in order to obtain the maximum joint efficiency

80 (Fig. 14(b)). A higher resistance adhesive (AralditeÒ
100
60 2011) was used to increase the joint efficiency (Table
40 3). The geometric and elastic properties of the plates
50
20 and patches are similar to those shown in Table 1.
0 0 Analysing Fig. 14(a), it is possible to understand that
0 10 20 30 40 50
we have full strength recovery after repair in the joints in
L [mm] which the stacking sequences lead to lower strength on
Fig. 12. Influence of the overlap length on rC, considering elastic– the load direction. On the other hand, for the joints in
plastic behaviour. which the plates have higher strength properties along
1954 R.D.S.G. Campilho et al. / Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958

100 16

90 14

80
12
70
10

L [mm]
60

50 8

40
6
30 L (EF)
4
20
2
L (PF)
10

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

(a) Stacking sequence (b) Stacking sequence

Fig. 14. Joint efficiency (a) and the overlap length leading to maximum efficiency (b) in double-lap joints for the stacking sequences considered.

Table 3 before repair with the increase of its thickness. There-

Mechanical properties and stacking sequences fore, as the residual load strength of the repair is always
Adhesive Stacking sequences the same despite the changes in the plate thickness, the
(AralditeÒ 2011) efficiency decreases with the increase of the plate thick-
E = 3.4 GPa 1
(02/752/
752/902)2S 5
(02/302/
302/902)2S ness. It can be concluded that single and double-lap
m = 0.35 2
(02/602/
602/902)2S 6
(02/152/
152/902)2S joints efficiency is highly dependent on the plate thick-
se = 40 MPa 3
(02/452/
452/902)2S 7
(032)
ness. This dependence can somehow be neutralized
ss = 52 MPa 4
(02/902)3S
using flush repairs instead of the repair techniques stud-
ied here.
the load direction, the efficiency does not reach 100%,
and the lowest value obtained was 24% for the laminate
(032). Moreover, for the higher strength laminates, it is 4. Damage growth
necessary the full extent of the overlap length (15 mm)
to obtain the full efficiency of the joint (Fig. 14(b)). Several researchers have dedicated their studies to the
For the joints presenting an efficiency of 100% it is not strength prediction, including simulation of damage on-
necessary the full extent of overlap length between plates set and growth, of bonded joints. Charalambides and
and patches. In these cases, failure occurs in the plates. Kinloch [9] calculated the strain energy release rate, G,
for crack interlaminar growth using the J-integral meth-
3.2. Plate thickness od. Three possible types of failure for the repair joints
were analysed in order to predict the expected failure
Fig. 15 presents the influence of the plate thickness on paths and failure loads. The general agreement between
the joint efficiency (considering elastic failure), for the the experimental observations, and predictions of the
seven stacking sequences presented in Table 3. It can failure path and loads was found to be good. Pradhan
be observed that, for each laminate, the joint efficiency et al. [15] analysed adhesive bonded joints using the fi-
diminish with the increase of plate thickness. This can nite element method by computing the strain energy re-
be explained by the increase of the plates load strength lease rate for debonding. Paired nodes are generated on
the interfaces and released one after another in a proper
100 sequence, modelling gradual crack growth. Bogdano-
90 vich et al. [16] present a new development of three-
80 dimensional variational stress/strain and progressive
70
failure analysis of adhesive composite joints. The pro-
gressive failure analysis uses the strain energy release
60
rate to predict different scenarios of cohesive, adhesive
[%]

50
1 2
or interlaminar crack growth. Gonçalves et al. [17] used
40 3 4 interface finite elements including a mixed-mode dam-
5 6
30
7 age model to simulate progressive debonding in single-
20 lap adhesive joints. The damage model combines aspects
10 of strength-based analysis and fracture mechanics and
0 includes a linear softening process, which allows a
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
smoothly decrease of stresses as the relative displace-
tp [mm]
ments grows. The area under the softening curve is
Fig. 15. Influence of the plates thickness on joint efficiency. equated to the critical energy release rate. The authors
 R.D.S.G. Campilho et al. / Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958 1955
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
concluded that the model is accurate in predicting the
de ¼ d2I þ d2II ð6Þ
jointsÕ mechanical behaviour.
The joints strength was also evaluated considering a and a mixed mode ratio
mixed-mode damage model which allows simulating
dII
damage initiation and growth. For this purpose, a cohe- b¼ ð7Þ
dI
sive model based on zero thickness 6-node interface
elements [13,14] compatible with the 8-node two-dimen- and considering Eq. (1), Eq. (5) can be rewritten as
sional continuum elements of ABAQUSÒ software was
2
2
dom;I dom;II
used. The constitutive equation can be defined in two þ ¼ 1; ð8Þ
different ways (see Fig. 16). Before damage starts to do;I do;II
grow where dom,i are the relative displacements at damage ini-
r ¼ Dd; ð1Þ tiation, corresponding to critical interface stresses rum,i
(Fig. 16). Combining Eqs. (6)–(8), the values of dom,i
where D is the diagonal matrix containing the penalty can be easily obtained:
parameters. For the softening stress/relative displace-
ment simulating a gradual failure it can be written as do;I do;II bdo;I do;II
dom;I ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ; dom;II ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi . ð9Þ
r ¼ ðI
EÞDd; ð2Þ do;II þ b2 d2o;I
2
d2o;II þ b2 d2o;I

where I is the identity matrix, E a diagonal matrix con- The mixed-mode damage propagation is studied consid-
taining the damage parameters ering the linear energetic criterion
du;i ðdi
do;i Þ GI GII
ei ¼ ð3Þ þ ¼ 1. ð10Þ
di ðdu;i
do;i Þ GIC GIIC
and do,i the displacement corresponding to the onset of The released energy in each mode at complete failure
damage. In pure mode loading, the strength along other can be obtained from the area of the minor triangle of
directions is abruptly cancelled. The maximum relative Fig. 16
displacement du,i, for which complete failure occurs is Gi ¼ 12rum;i dum;i ð11Þ
obtained by equating the area under the softening curve
to the respective critical fracture energy being dum,i (i = I, II), the relative displacement in each
direction for which complete failure occurs. Using Eqs.
Gic ¼ 12ru;i du;i . ð4Þ (1), (4), (6), (7), (10) and (11), it can be obtained
In adhesive joints, the failure is more likely to occur qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
under mixed-mode loading. In this case, damage initia- 1 þ b2
tion can be predicted from the quadratic stress based dum;I ¼
1
1
ð12Þ
do;e ððdo;I du;I Þ þ b2 ðdo;II du;II Þ Þ
criterion

2
2
rI rII and, consequently, dum,II by considering Eq. (7). The val-
þ ¼ 1 if rI P 0; ues of dum,i and dom,i are introduced into Eq. (3), instead
ru;I ru;II ð5Þ
of do,i and du,i, establishing the damage parameter for
rII ¼ ru;II if rI 6 0; each mode.
where it is assumed that normal compressive stress do
not induce damage and ru,I, ru,II represent the ultimate 4.1. Single-lap joints
normal and shear stresses, respectively. Defining an
equivalent mixed mode displacement The simulation of a single-lap joint with (02, 902)S
plates includes interface elements located at the regions
indicated in Fig. 17 by the dashed lines. Initially, identi-
cal mechanical and fracture properties were considered
for the interfaces between layers and between the plates
and the adhesive: GIC = 0.3 N/mm, GIIC = 0.6 N/mm,
ru,I = ru,II = 40 MPa. The objective is to evaluate the
conditions leading to adhesive, cohesive or delamination
failure. In these conditions, it was verified (Fig. 18) that
failure initiates and grows at the adhesive/plates and
adhesive/patch interfaces. Gradually reducing the inter-
laminar and adhesive strength properties, it was ob-
served a cohesive failure for ru,I = ru,II = 30 MPa, i.e.,
Fig. 16. The bilinear softening law for pure mode and mixed mode. 75% or below than the plates/adhesive interfaceÕs
1956 R.D.S.G. Campilho et al. / Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958
Fig. 17. Location of the interface elements in the joint.
strengths (Fig. 19). The mechanical and fracture proper-
ties were gradually reduced in order to identify the val-
ues leading to delamination failure. It was verified that
even considering very low values (GIC = 0.1 N/mm,
GIIC = 0.2 N/mm, ru,I = ru,II = 6 MPa) failure still took
place at the adhesive/plates interface, even though some
points at interfaces between layers undergo the softening
process.
4.2. Double-lap joints
The simulation of double-lap joints was performed
considering symmetry conditions. A similar study, con-
Fig. 18. Failure initiation and growth at the plates/adhesive and adhesive/patches interfaces (single-lap joint).
Fig. 19. Failure initiation and growth at the middle of the adhesive (single-lap joint).
sidering the same initial properties used in the single-lap
joint, was performed for a double-lap joint considering
(02,902)2S plates. Joint failure also took place at the
adhesive/plates and adhesive/patches interfaces (Fig.
20). A cohesive failure (Fig. 21) was obtained by reduc-
ing the strengths of all interfaces except those at the
plates/adhesive and adhesive/patches interfaces to
ru,I = ru,II = 39 MPa. It is possible to conclude that, in
double-lap joints where the adhesive and plates/adhesive
interface properties are similar, failure may occur on
both, even though more likely in the plates/adhesive
interface. In order to define the conditions leading to
interlaminar failure of the plates (Fig. 22), the strength
of the interfaces between layers were gradually dimin-
ished until ru,I = ru,II = 22 MPa, i.e., interlaminar
strength properties equal to 55% or below than those
of the adhesive and the plates/adhesive interfaces. As
it can be seen, the failure occurs between the two 00 lay-
ers closest to the adhesive. Acting only upon the values
of GIC and GIIC simultaneously, and reducing them to
10% of their initial value, failure still occurs at the
plates/adhesive interface. However, reducing simulta-
neously the strengths and fracture properties, an inter-
laminar failure was obtained for the following
properties: GIC = 0.174 N/mm, GIIC = 0.348 N/mm,
ru,I = ru,II = 24.2 MPa, which represents 58% of their
 R.D.S.G. Campilho et al. / Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958 1957

Fig. 20. Failure initiation and growth at the plates/adhesive and adhesive interfaces (double-lap joint).

Fig. 21. Failure initiation and growth at the middle of the adhesive (double-lap joint).

Fig. 22. Failure initiation and growth at the layers interface (double-lap joint).

Fig. 23. Failure initiation and growth at the layers interface with matrix cracking (double-lap joint).

initial values. Therefore, it is concluded that, in this mat-
ter, GIC and GIIC have very little influence on the failure
mode of the joint.
The repair of a (902,02)2S double-lap laminate, i.e.,
with the outer layers not load oriented, was also simu-
lated. In this case, an additional failure mode is possible:
intralaminar transverse matrix cracking of the outer
layer and crack growth along the interface between this
and the adjacent one. To simulate this situation, an ex-
tra interface element is inserted into the model at the
critical region as shown in the detail of Fig. 17. For
the considered initial properties, failure occurs at the
plates/adhesive and adhesive/patches interfaces, some-
how in a similar way of Fig. 18. For ru,I = ru,II = 39 M-
Pa at all interfaces except those at the plates/adhesive
and adhesive/patches interfaces, a cohesive failure of
the joint is observed. Reducing the interlaminar and
the transverse matrix strengths to 37 MPa (92% of the
adhesive and layers/adhesive interface strength proper-
ties), an intralaminar matrix cracking of the outer layer
inducing delamination between the two outer layers, can
be observed (Fig. 23).
Although the results presented in this section may de-
pend on materials properties, stacking sequences and
geometric parameters, it can be concluded that the model
simulates the different failure modes typical of these
joints.
5. Concluding remarks
The objective of this work was to study the influence
of the major geometric parameters on single and double-
lap carbon–fibre composite repaired joints, as well as to
optimize them in order to obtain the maximum residual
strength. The joints residual strength and efficiency are
also predicted for several combinations of plate thick-
nesses/stacking sequences.
One of the main findings of this work was related to
the influence of the overlap length on the remote elastic
failure stress of the joint. Either for single and double-
lap joints, there was a certain value of overlap length
above which there is no strength advantage, since from
a certain overlap length the central region is practically
1958 R.D.S.G. Campilho et al. / Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 1948–1958
unloaded. If adhesive plastic behaviour is considered,
the remote failure stress increases proportionally with
the overlap length. Shear and peel stresses were charac-
terized along the overlap length at the adhesive, plates
and adhesive/plates interface for both joint configura-
tions. For single-lap joints, it was observed that both
stress components are higher at the adherend/adhesive
and adhesive/patches interfaces, which means that fail-
ure will probably occur at or near these locations,
although the material plate properties also have an
important role in this process. Peel stresses, which may
lead to delaminations, are higher in single-lap joints
due to the bending event. In double-lap joints it was ob-
served that, for higher values of patch stiffness, the peel
stresses at the plates increase in such manner that failure
will no longer occur at the adhesive, but by delamina-
tion of the plates adjacent layers. Extremely thin patches
reduce joint strength as failure will occur by tensile stress
failure of the patches.
The repaired joints efficiency is obviously higher for
those laminates in which the stacking sequences propiti-
ate lower strength characteristics according to the load
direction. For those laminates whose stacking sequences
induce higher strength in the load direction the efficiency
is lower, reaching values as low as 24% for a unidirec-
tional laminate. It is also observed that the joint effi-
ciency is highly influenced by the plateÕs thickness. In
fact, the raise in the plate thickness decreases its effi-
ciency, since the remote failure load of an undamaged
plate increase, whilst the repaired plate load strength re-
mains unchanged. This dependence may somehow be
avoided using flush repairs, embedded in the plates.
Damage initiation and growth was also simulated in
repaired joints. In single-lap joints it was verified that,
for identical properties of the adhesive, interlaminar
and adhesive/plates interfaces, damage initiated and
grew at the adhesive/plates and adhesive/patch inter-
faces. A cohesive failure was observed for adhesive
and interlaminar strength properties equal to 75% or be-
low than those of the adhesive/plates interfaces.
Although the interlaminar properties were drastically re-
duced, no interlaminar failure was observed. For dou-
ble-lap joints, considering the initial properties, failure
took place at the adhesive/plates and adhesive/patches
interfaces. A slight reduction of the adhesive strengths
leads to a cohesive failure, which means that failure is
likely to occur in both ways. Reducing only the inter-
laminar properties to about 50–60% of their initial val-
ues it is observed an interlaminar failure. Hence, this
situation can occur when very high resistance adhesives
are used to execute the repair.
Acknowledgement
The de Moura thanks the Portuguese Foundation for
Science and Technology (FCT, research project POCTI/
EME/45573/2002) for supporting the work here
presented.
References
[1] Davis M, Bond D. Principles and practices of adhesive bonded
structural joints and repairs. Int J Adhesion Adhesives 1999;19:
91–105.
[2] Hu F, Soutis C. Strength prediction of patch repaired CFRP
laminates loaded in compression. Compos Sci Technol
2000;60:1103–14.
[3] Soutis C, Duan D. Compressive behaviour of CFRP laminates
repaired with adhesively bonded external repairs. Compos Struct
1999;45:289–301.
[4] Reis P, Antunes F. Influence of superposition length on mechan-
ical resistance of single-lap adhesive joints. Compos Struct
2005;67(1):125–33.
[5] Yang C, Huang H. Elastic–plastic model of adhesive-bonded
single-lap composite joints. J Compos Mater 2004;38:293–309.
[6] Ganesh V, Choo T. Modulus graded composite adherends for
single-lap bonded joints. J Compos Mater 2002;36:1757–67.
[7] Odi R, Friend C. A comparative study of finite element models
for the bonded repair of composite structures. J Reinf Plast
Compos 2002;21:311–32.
[8] Chan W, Vedhagiri S. Analysis of composite bonded/bolted joints
used in repairing. J Compos Mater 2001;35:1045–61.
[9] Charalambides M, Kinloch A. Adhesively-bonded repairs to
fibre-composite materials II: finite element modelling. Composites
Part A 1998;29A:1383–96.
[10] Oztelcan C, Ochoa O. Design and analysis of test coupons for
composite blade repairs. Compos Struct 1997;37:185–93.
[11] Mahdi S, Kinloch A. The static mechanical performance of
repaired composite sandwich beams: Part II – finite element
modelling. J Sandwich Struct Mater 2003;5:267–303.
[12] Odi R, Friend C. An improved 2D model for bonded composite
joints. Int J Adhesion Adhesives 2004;24:389–405.
[13] de Moura MFSF, Gonçalves JPM, Marques AT, de Castro PT.
Modeling compression failure after low velocity impact on
laminated composites using interface elements. J Compos Mater
1997;31:1462–79.
[14] Gonçalves JPM, de Moura MFSF, de Castro PT, Marques AT.
Interface element including point-to-surface constraints for three-
dimensional problems with damage propagation. Eng Comput:
Int J Comp Aided Eng Software 2000;17:28–47.
[15] Pradhan SC, Iyengar NGR, Kishore NN. Parametric study of
interfacial debonding in adhesively bonded composite joints.
Compos Struct 1994;29:119–25.
[16] Bogdanovich AE, Yushanov SP. 3D progressive failure analysis
of bonded composite joints. In: AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC
structures, structural dynamics and materials conference 2,
AIAA; 1998. p. 1616–26.
[17] Gonçalves JPM, de Moura MFSF, Magalhães AG, de Castro
PMST. Application of interface finite elements to three-dimen-
sional progressive failure analysis of adhesive joints. Fatig Fract
Eng Mater Struct 2003;26:479–86.