1. Optimal Design of a Composite Scarf Repair Under Uniaxial Tension Loading T.D. Breitzman, US Air Force Research Laboratory E.V. Iarve, University of Dayton research Institute, US G.A. Schoeppner, US Air Force Research Laboratory B.M. Cook, US Air Force Research Laboratory Multiscale Modeling of Composites Workshop Cleveland, OH, US 23-24 July, 2009

2. Motivation Composite Repair Needs are Increasing Scarf Repair –repair technology –adhesive properties –patch geometry –special requirements –patch composition (ply-by-ply replacement?)

3. Specimen preparation Basic material properties Experimental results Modeling approach Optimization Conclusion Outline

4. Large Tensile Panels – Manufacture Cut coupons from panels –Bond tabs (EPON 828) –Drill holes for grip interface Scarf portion of coupons –Scarfomatic –Manufacture vacuum table jig –Fairly repeatable PanelOutside Dia (in)Inside Dia (in) 419T2.74 to 2.831.10 to 1.12 420B2.68 to 2.751.06 to 1.08 423T2.60 to 2.690.98 to 1.00 419T2.74 to 2.831.10 to 1.12 420B2.68 to 2.751.06 to 1.08 423T2.60 to 2.690.98 to 1.00 418T2.69 to 2.790.94 to 0.96 419B2.67 to 2.780.85 to 0.87 422B2.81.1 423B2.62 to 2.741.00 to 1.05 Half scarf angle = 87 0 ±0.26 (87 0 -nominal) (pool of 40 angle data points)

5. Tensile Testing – Scarfed Laminate IM6/3501-6 [45/0/-45/90] s

6. Tool Box B-Spline Analysis Method Variable defect B-spline approximation in 3-D, (p-element–particular case. Multibasis global-local approximations for laminated structures General anisotropy, including continuous point-wise variability Cluster – BSAM solid element Cluster geometries are restricted to being parametric 1 1 q f qcqc fcfc m q 3 m q 2 m q 1 m -max. stress concentration Critical Failure Volume (CFV) Fiber Failure Mesh Independent Damage Model

7. ult =1.2% Basic material properties Fiber direction strength X t = ult E 11 = 1.82GPa V 0 =0.78mm 3 Weibull modulus =40 (Wisnom (2005)) Stiffness properties composite FM300M adhesive Manufacturer data, KGR-1 instrumentation Tensile testing 2 - ¾x4 specimens with tabs Poissons ratio Strain gage comparison of x to y

8. Tensile Testing – Scarfed Laminate Small Coupons Used for Calibration CFV WI Scarf Coupons IM6/3501-6; [45/0/-45/90] s Ply-by-ply 3D analysis (BSAM)

9. Repaired Specimen Testing Large virgin panels Grip failures Some gage section failures Significant scatter of strength Repaired panels Apparent brittle failure The patch is mainly intact The overply delaminates Instrumentation

10. Flush Repair Analysis Patch Adhesive Scarf

11. Elastic adhesive Scarfed panel Nonlinear Strength Prediction Stress in fiber direction Incremental Nonlinear analysis Load increment (17.23Mpa) Equilibration Predict average fiber failure load F f P>F f No Yes STOP: F f Adhesive failure appears sudden and determines the failure of the repair

12. Adhesive Stress Concentration Motivation for Optimal Deisgn Problem [45/0/-45/90/90/-45/0/45]

13. Optimal Design Problem 45 0 -45 90 -45 0 45 0 -45 90 -45 0 45 ???????????????? F=L p ( vm ) Optimization solution minimizes elastic stress field in the adhesive vm – von Mises stress p=15 Simplex method used for optimization

14. Optimization Results – No overply

15. Case Study: Extension/Bending Thermal only, ΔT=-150C u x =u y =u z =0 on x=±285.75mm Thermal + Mechanical, ΔT=-150C u x =±0.05, u y =u z =0 on x=±285.75mm

16. Case Study: Scarf Angle

17. Overply Repair Analysis Scarf Geometry (2-D cut-away view) Blue – Overply Yellow – Adhesive Red – Patch Green - Adherend Model OP1 Model OP2

18. Case Study: Overply Thickness 45° overply 0° overply 2t 4t 8t No overply The overply is attached to the top of the adherend without adhesive Model OP1

19. Case Study: Overply angle Overply angle is not aligned with loading direction due to peel stress in the adhesive on top Model OP1 Model OP2

20. Optimized patch & overply angles ParentPly by plyOffset Optimized Model OP1 Optimized Model OP2 overply-72.-45.15.26-54.7 45.000 011.74643.809 0.0000 -45-45.282-37.435 -45.000 900.11019-121.78 90.000 9091.26767.234 90.000 -45-12.12315.001 -45.000 0-25.158-54.138 0.0000 4548.47444.783 45.000 4550.41757.455

21. Strength Results No Overply With Overply

22. Strength Results

23. Conclusions Developed highly repetitive scarfing and repair procedures for IM6/3501-6 composites by using Scarfomatic device. Benchmarked strength prediction of scarfed and repaired panels based on small UNNOTCHED coupon tensile strength calibration –Good agreement with both scarfed and repair strength –Modeling of adhesive failure is critical for repair strength prediction Optimization of the patch composition to delay adhesive failure –Understood the stress transfer mechanisms with/- the overply –20% or more effect on strength due to patch composition Softening of the patch –Fabric patch makeup –Stress in the adherend Future work –Adhesive characterization –Multidirectional loading –Testing

24. Case Study: Overply Thickness