First Evaluation Presentation on

Behaviour of
Bolted Joints Of FRP
Composite Laminated
Structures
By:
Hitesh Parghi
(13517012)

Under Guidance of
Dr. Anupam Chakrabarti

Presentation outline
Factors
Model

affecting behavior of bolted joints in Fibre Reinforced Composites

Development & Validation

Problem description

Model development

Validation

Implementation

of Progressive Failure

Introduction

User subroutine : USDFLD

USDFLD Validation

Parametric

study

Aspects

Results & discussion

Future

study scope

Conclusions
References

Factors affecting behavior of bolted

joints in Fibre Reinforced Composites

Failure modes and bearing strength - Important behavioural aspects to be

studied for any bolted joint

By altering some factors - Desired failure mode and strength can be

achieved

This factors are divided in Three distinct categories (Godwin et al. 1980)

Material Parameters (i.e., Lamination scheme)

Fastener Parameters (i.e., Tightening torque)

Design Parameters (i.e., e/d ratio)

Need of the hour : Numerical models should be developed which can

simulate behaviour of joints close to real life scenario

Model development & validation

Present
A

study :

three dimensional finite element model In Abaqus

Verification

against available results

Development
Validation

of user subroutine Nonlinear model

of nonlinear model against available results

Parametric

studies

Problem description

Figure & Table 1. Joint geometry

(McCarthy et al. 2004)

Length of each plate (l)

155

Diameter of bolt (d)

Width of each plate (w)

48

Thickness of each plate (t)

5.2

Edge distance (e)

24

Washer dimensions (OD, ID,

Thickness)

15, 8.4,
1.2

Model Development : Parts

Bolted composite joint - Three dimensional in nature (Padhi et al. 2002)

Clamping force, Bending of bolt, Delamination are in

third dimension

Plates also show out of plane deformations

Three dimensional deformable solid

parts

Grip length excluded Reduce analysis

time

Further partition of parts Efficient

meshing

Parts are assembled together to form

joint

Washer

Nut &
Head

Bolt Shank

Composite
Plate

Figure 2. Parts

Figure 3. Assembly

Model development : Materials

Plates

- CFRP (HTA/6376)

90

- [45/0/-45/90]5s (Total 40 plies)

Bolt & nut

Washer

- 45

- Aerospace grade Titanium alloy

0
45

- Steel

Figure 4. Lamination
scheme
[45/0/-45/90]5s

Table 2. Mechanical Properties

(McCarthy et al.
2004)
CFRP
(HTA/6376)
E11
(Gpa)

E22 (Gpa)

E33
(Gpa)

G12
(Gpa)

G13
(Gpa)

G23
(Gpa)

12

13

23

140

10

10

5.2

3.9

3.9

0.3

0.3

0.5

XT
(Mpa)

XC(Mpa)

2170

1600

YT(Mpa) YC(Mpa) S12(Mpa S23(Mpa

)
)
73

Titanium (Bolt)

250

83

50

Steel (Washer)

E (GPa)

E (GPa)

110

0.29

210

0.3

Model development : Contact & Load

u=0,v=0,w
=0

v=0,w=
0

Figure 5. Plate to Plate

Contact

Figure 8. Uniaxial
Displacement

Figure 6. Bolt Contact

with other Parts

Figure 7. Washer
Contact with other

Figure 9. Bolt
preload

Bolt preload

To simulate bolt tightening

7.2 MPa (Identical to finger

tight bolt) (McCarthy et
al. 2004)

Model development : Mesh

Figure 10. Meshed parts

& Model

Abaqus element C3D8R (8 node - 3 Dimensional solid

elements)

Finer mesh near hole

To accommodate higher stress concentrations

No. of elements = 71252

Model validation
1. Joint Stiffness (kN/mm)
Table 3. Validation Joint
stiffness
McCarthy et al. (2004)
Present
34.60

Difference
(%)

34.21

2. Out of plane displacement

( u3 )

-1.12

3. Stress variation

McCarthy et
al. (2004)
Ekh et al.
(2001)
Present

McCarthy et al.
(2004)
Present

Progressive failure analysis

Abaqus do not provide damage modelling for 3D solid elements of Fibre reinforced
composites therefore with default material library only linear analysis can be
performed

To implement damage models & non linear analysis one have to code user subroutines
(UMAT, USDFLD, etc.)

In present study user subroutine UMAT (User material) & USDFLD (User defined field
variables) are coded in Fortran compiler & coupled with Abaqus solver to enhance
material modelling capabilities of Abaqus

UMAT Can model complex material constitutive relations (Gave convergence issues)

USDFLD Properties can be dependent on field variables (Used for Progressive failure in
present study)

Progressive failure analysis

Failure mode is evaluated (Fibre failure or Matrix failure)

Corresponding properties are degraded

Redistribution of stresses to other elements

Hashins failure
theory

Classical failure theories do not distinguish

between fibre and matrix failure

Property degradation

Hashin (1980) proposed new failure criteria

for unidirectional fibre reinforced composites

Fibre Tension Failure

- If 11 0,

Fibre Compression
Failure
2
- If11 11 < 10,failure

11
122 132 1 failure

S122
1 no failure
X T

1 no failure

X C

Matrix Tension Failure - If 22 + 33

2
2
2
33
1 failure
>22 0,
232 22 33 12
2
T

2
23

13

2
12

1 no failure

Matrix Compression Failure - If 22 +

2
2
33

0,
22 33 232 22 33 122 2
YC <
22
33

1
2S 23

YC

4S

2
23

2
23

13

2
12

1 failure
1 no failure

If failure has occurred

Gradual degradation

Instantaneous degradation (Identical to real life

scenario)

Reduction to 95% in original value of property

Proper
ty

Table 4. Property
degradation rules
Tensil Compressi Tensile
e
ve Fibre
Matrix
Fibre

Compress
ive Matrix

E11

E22

E33

G12

G13

G23

Get stresses

Check for
failure

Property definition

USDFL
D FLOW
CHART
Figure 11. USDFLD

Update field
variables

USDFLD VALIDATION

Verification against

Plate (Reddy et al. 1995)

Experiments

Simulations

Bolted joint (McCarthy et al.

2001)

Experiments

Nonlinear simulation
Table 5. Model description - Composite plate
(Reddy et al. 1995)

Figure 12. Single bolted joint

(McCarthy et al. 2001)

Model

Lamination scheme

Length
(mm)

Width
(mm)

Depth
(mm)

L1

(45/90/-45/0)3s

76.2

25.4

6.35

L2

(45/90/-45/0/0/0/45/0/0/0/45/0)s

76.2

25.4

6.35

L3

(45/90/-45/45/45/0/45/-45/45/-45)s

76.2

38.1

6.35
Figure 13. Composite plate (Reddy et
al. 1995)

USDFLD Validation (with Reddy et al. 1995)

Load displacement curve (L1)
78.82
14.73

45.8
39.23

1.76

125.2
123.04

Experiments
1.77

80.2
78.82

Present
(Simulation)
Diff.(%)

Reddy et al. (1995)

Present

Comparision : Ultimate Load

Load displacement curve (L2)

Load displacement curve (L3)

123.04

39.23

Reddy et al.
(1995)
Present

Reddy et al. (1995)

Present

USDFLD Validation (with McCarthy et al. 2001)

Load displacement curve (Single Bolt)

Experiments
Present (Simulation)
McCarthy et al. (Non linear
Simulation)

Comparision : Ultimate Load

27.03 27.39

Comparision : Displacement at ultimate Load

3.18

Experiments
Present
(Simulation)
2.99

1.33

Experiments
Present
(Simulation)

Parametric study

Linear and nonlinear models are in good agreement with past experiments
and simulations

So for further study parameters are varied and effect of these parameters
on behaviour of bolted joints of fibre reinforced composite material

Various factors affecting behaviour of bolted joints were listed in previous

slides

For current study following factors are varied

1.

e/d

e/d = 1

e/d = 2

e/d = 3

e/d = 4

e/d = 5

Variation of e/d

Up to certain value of e/d, increase in strength with increasing

e/d ratio

e/d

Table 5. Model dimensions for

ratios
Edgedifferent
distance e/dHole
diameter
Length of each plate
(e)

(d)

(l)

48

16

64

24

80

32

96

40

112

Results & Discussion

Out of plane displacement
(For 1 mm axial displacement)

Joint Stiffness
34.71

e/d=1
e/d=2
e/d=3

34.26

32.12

23.65

e/d=4
e/d=5

Ultimate
load
27.39

25.97

27.78

27.49

15.58

After e/d > 2

Ultimate load gets stable

Decrease in joint stiffness

30.38

Final failure Total failure mode (Fibre +

Matrix)

e/d =
1

e/d =
2

e/d =
4

e/d =
5
Figure 14. Total
failure mode

e/d =
3

Variation of Fibre orientation (Lamination

scheme)
Fibre orientation Mainly effects failure mode of bolted connection

45

0
0

-45
45

0
45

-45

45

Figure 15. Variation of fibre

orientation
90

90

-45

-45

0
90

-45
0

0
0

45

6 different ply stacking sequence (e/d = 3)

5 layers of above lamination scheme & a symmetric layer of same 20 plies Total

Results and discussion :

Ultimate load
Comparision : Ultimate load
For uniaxial
loading,
Laminate without 0 plies

27.39
23.55
20.11
18.56

21.59

23.62
[45/-45/45/-45]5s

[0/0/0/0]5s
[0/90/0/90]5s

[0/-45/0/-45]5s

Laminate with only 0 plies

[0/45/0/45]5s
[45/0/-45/90]5s

Very low load bearing capacity & a

stable failure

Little higher strength but early but

catastrophic failure

Asymmetric laminate

Highest strength and stable failure

mode

Failure modes

[0/0/0/0]5s

[0/90/0/90]5s

[45/-45/45/-45]5s

[0/-45/0/-45]5s

[0/45/0/45]5s

[45/0/-45/90]5s

Figure 16. Total

Future study scope

Detailed analysis of results obtained

Combined study of e/d ratio & fibre orientation

Variation of tightening torque & Temperature

Application of progressive failure to multi bolt joint

Conclusions

Linear & Non linear models Good agreement with

experiments & other simulations

Parametric study e/d ratio & Fibre orientation

Following observations are made

For e/d>2

o
o

No major change in strength of joint

Stable failure mode is achieved

Composite with no 0 fibres Very low strength

Asymmetric fibre orientation 50 % Higher strength then

laminate without 0 fibres and a stable failure mode is achieved

Use of 45 or -45 fibres No noticeable change in strength and

failure mode

References

Abaqus CAE users manual , (2013), Version 6.13, Dassault systems.

Godwin E.W., Matthews F.L. , (1980), A Review of the strength of joints in fibre-reinforced
plastics , Composites, Vol. 10, pp. 155-160.

Padhi G.S., McCarthy M.A., (2002), McCarhty C.T., BOLJAT : a tool for designing
composite bolted joints using three-dimensional finite element analysis, Composites Part
A : applied science & manufacturing, Vol. 33, pp. 1573-1584.

McCarthy M.A., McCarthy C.T., Lawlor V.P., Stanely W.F. , (2004), Three-dimensional finite
element analysis of single-bolt, single-lap composite bolted joints:P1Model
development and validation, Composite structures ,Vol. 71, pp. 140-158.

Reddy Y.S.N., Dakshina Moorthy C.M., Reddy J.N., (1995), Non-linear progressive failure
analysis of laminated composite plates, Int. J. Non-linear Mechanics, Vol. 30, pp. 629-649

Lawlor V.P., McCarthy M.A., Stanely W.F., (2001), Experimental study on the effects of
clearance on single-bolt, single-shear, composite bolted joints, J. Plastic rubber and
composites, Vol. 31, pp. 405-411.

Z. Hashin, (1980), Failure criteria for unidirectional fibre composites, J. of applied

mechanics ASME, Vol.47, pp. 329-334.

Questions
&
Recommendations

THANK YOU
ALL