article · Frontiers in Engineering and Built Environment
Purpose This paper comprehensively addresses the influence of chopped strand mat glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) patch configurations such as geometry, dimensions, position and the number of layers of patches, whether a single or double patch is used and how well debonding the area under the patch improves the strength of the cracked aluminum plates with different crack lengths. Design/methodology/approach Single-edge cracked aluminum specimens of 150 mm in length and 50 mm in width were tested using the tensile test. The cracked aluminum specimens were then repaired using GFRP patches with various configurations. A three-dimensional (3D) finite element method (FEM) was adopted to simulate the repaired cracked aluminum plates using composite patches to obtain the stress intensity factor (SIF). The numerical modeling and validation of ABAQUS software and the contour integral method for SIF calculations provide a valuable tool for further investigation and design optimization. Findings The width of the GFRP patches affected the efficiency of the rehabilitated cracked aluminum plate. Increasing patch width WP from 5 mm to 15 mm increases the peak load by 9.7 and 17.5%, respectively, if compared with the specimen without the patch. The efficiency of the GFRP patch in reducing the SIF increased as the number of layers increased, i.e. the maximum load was enhanced by 5%. Originality/value This study assessed repairing metallic structures using the chopped strand mat GFRP. Furthermore, it demonstrated the superiority of rectangular patches over semicircular ones, along with the benefit of using double patches for out-of-plane bending prevention and it emphasizes the detrimental effect of defects in the bonding area between the patch and the cracked component. This underlines the importance of proper surface preparation and bonding techniques for successful repair. Graphical abstract
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1108/febe-03-2024-0006
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.