Experimentally Calibrating Cohesive Zone Models for Structural Automotive Adhesives Mark Oliver October 19, 2016 Adhesives and Sealants Council Fall Convention contact@veryst.com www.veryst.com
Outline Cohesive Zone Modeling (CZM) Introduction Experimental Measurement of Cohesive Laws Measuring Adhesive Joint Toughness at High Rates Rate dependent CZM Inverse Calibration Approach 2
Cohesive Zone Modeling (CZM) 3
Predicting Failure of Adhesive Joints Stresses in adhesive joints can be highly complex Behavior of bonded joints during crash events is a significant concern Bonded Joint Stress in Adhesive Layer 4
Cohesive Zone Modeling Cohesive zone modeling is an approach for modeling failure of adhesive joints in finite element analyses The adhesive deformation/failure is defined by relating the applied stress on the adhesive, σ, to the separation of the adhesive, δ : σ σ σ σ(δ) Adhesive δ Adhesive δ c Adhesive Adhesive δ δ C σ σ 5
Relationship to Material Properties Cohesive Zone Models captures several commonly measured mechanical properties: Material Property Related CZM Parameter Modulus, E Strength, σ Toughness, G C /J C Stiffness, k Max Stress, σ max J σ δ Adhesive Strain to Failure δ c σ max Due to differences in the stress state between a tensile specimen and an adhesive joint, the properties do not match exactly k J δ C σ δ 6
Measurement of Cohesive Zone Laws 7
CZM Calibration Cohesive Zone Models must be experimentally calibrated for every adhesive Calibration can be done using standard test specimens widely used in the adhesives industry For joint designers using finite element analysis, having the cohesive zone model parameters allows them to predict performance of joints made with different/new adhesives 8
Measuring Traction-Separation Laws The traction separation law is defined as the derivative of the J- integral (J) with respect to the adhesive separation (δ). J and δ are both measureable using standard adhesive test specimens. J = 0 δ cσ δ dδ σ δ = dj dδ σ J δ 9
J-Integral The J-integral is a measure of crack driving force and can be applied to adhesive joints. J has units of joules/meter 2. J = Γ Wdy T i u i x ds P n ds Γ W = strain energy density T i = normal traction vector P 10
Measuring J-Integral for Adhesive Joints The DCB specimen has a very simple J-Integral solution, depending only upon the applied load, P, and the beam opening angles, θ. The beam angles can be measured with digital image correlation. Load, P J = 2Psin( θ 2) b θ Load, P beam width, b 11
Measuring Crack Separation, δ The crack separation, δ, can be measured using digital image correlation 12
J vs. Adhesive Separation, δ J I (J/m 2 ) 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Experiment Fit E σ max Fit Parameters 1.5 GPa 28.4 MPa J IC 2508 J/m 2 δ fail 0.12mm (48%) 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Adhesive Separation, δ (mm) Joint Toughness, J IC Once we have measured J as a function of δ, we have to differentiate: σ δ = dj I dδ This is best done by first fitting the data with a smooth function 13
J I (J/m 2 ) Stress (MPa) Final Cohesive Zone Model 3000 2500 Cohesive Zone Model 30 25 2000 1500 1000 500 0 E σ max Fit Parameters 1.5 GPa 28.4 MPa J IC 2508 J/m 2 δ fail 0.12mm (48%) 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Adhesive Separation, δ (mm) 20 15 10 5 The CZM for this adhesive is shown in red 14
Load (N) Check Simulated DCB Specimen 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Experiment CZM 0 2 4 6 8 10 Load Line Displacement (mm) We can check the cohesive zone model accuracy by simulating different tests to compare the measured and predicted load/displacement profiles 15
High Rate Measurement of Toughness 16
Rate-Dependent Cohesive Zone Models Adhesives can exhibit highly rate-dependent properties. Rate-dependent Cohesive Zone Models are required. σ σ max Increasing Rate - J increases - sigma max increases MAT-240 in LS-DYNA is one such model that is used in the automotive industry J To calibrate these models, we need to measure toughness as a function of loading rate δ 17
Impact-Rate Mode I Toughness A dowel pin is driven into the sample at 2-7 m/s. The crack tip strain rate is in the 100s per second. 2-7 m/s The J-Integral is calculated using the beam rotations measured by DIC θ 2 θ 1 J = E b 3 θ 1 θ 2 sin(θ 1 ) 3L 2 L E = width, b E (1 ν 2 ) 18
Impact-Rate Mode I Toughness J = E b 3 θ 1 θ 2 sin(θ 1 ) 3L 2 No measurement of load No measurement of crack length θ 2 θ 1 L width, b Video duration = 14 ms 19
J I (J/m 2 ) Rate-Dependent Toughness 4000 Impact DCB method 3000 2000 1000 ε = 250 sec 1 ε = 0.2 sec 1 ε = 0.001 sec 1 J curves for an automotive adhesive measured at three loading rates 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Normalized Test Time
Fracture Toughness, J IC (J/m 2 ) Rate Dependent Fracture Toughness 4000 3000 2000 1000 For finite element models, the properties must be provided as a function of crack tip strain rate, which can be experimentally measured or simulated. 0 0.0001 0.01 1 100 10000 Crack Tip Strain Rate (s -1 )
Mode II Toughness: Elastic-Plastic ENF Mode II ENF specimens for tough adhesives can be very large (~1 m in length) if linear elasticity is to be guaranteed in the beams. Using the J-integral solution for the ENF specimen allows for some plasticity in the beams during the experiment. J = P b 0.5θ A θ B + 0.5θ C No measurement of crack length P = applied load b = specimen thickness θ A = beam rotation at point A θ B = beam rotation at point B θ C = beam rotation at point C The beam rotations, θ, at point A,B, C are measured with DIC. B A C 22
J II (J/m 2 ) High Rate Mode II Toughness Measurement Crack location 2.5 m/sec Video Duration = 7 ms This method can be done at high rates using high speed videography to capture the specimen deformation J II = P b 0.5θ A θ B + 0.5θ C 20000 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 J IIC 0 1 2 3 4 5 Load Line Displacement (mm) 23
Shear Traction (MPa) J-Integral (kj/m 2 ) Elastic-Plastic ENF J-Solution Validation Using FEA, we can check that the test specimen dimensions are such that the plastic deformation in the beams does influence the results. 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Assumed Cohesive Law S = 45MPa Γ = 20kJ/m 2 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Shear Displacement (mm) 25 20 15 10 5 0 Measured J value J IC = 20.3 kj/m 2 Γ = 20.0 kj/m 2 J = P b 0.5θ A θ B + 0.5θ C 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Displacement (mm) 24
Inverse Calibration Approach 25
Material Model Parameters LS-DYNA MAT_240 has 16 parameters Measuring all of these accurately can be difficult One option is to measure a few parameters and use inverse calibration methods to optimize the rest of the parameters Parameter Mode I Value Mode II Value Modulus (MPa) Experiment Experiment J o (J/m 2 ) Experiment Experiment J inf (J/m 2 ) Experiment Experiment ε G Inverse calibration Inverse calibration T o /S o (MPa) Inverse calibration Inverse calibration T 1 /S 1 (MPa) Inverse calibration Inverse calibration ε T / ε S Inverse calibration Inverse calibration F G Inverse calibration Inverse calibration 26
Inverse Calibration Methodology Model Parameters to Be Solved For Fracture Experiment Experiment Model Finite Element Model of Experiment Predicted Load-Displacement to Experiment 27
Model Parameter Optimization Mode I Can optimize CZM to different experiment types and loading rates The inverse calibration is done using optimization software Mode II 28
Summary 29
Summary Cohesive zone modeling is an powerful method for predicting adhesive joint failure that is becoming more widely used These models can be experimentally calibrated using industrystandard test specimens High-rate toughness is particularly of interest for automotive adhesives For joint designers using finite element analysis, having the cohesive zone model parameters allows them to predict performance of joints made with different/new adhesives 30