Composite Structures 89 (2009) 475–483

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Three-dimensional asymptotic stress field in the vicinity of an adhesively

bonded scarf joint interface
Reaz A. Chaudhuri a,*, Sou-Hsiung Jack Chiu b
a
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, 122 S. Central Campus Dr., Room 304, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0560, United States
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9208, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A recently developed three-dimensional eigenfunction expansion approach for prediction of the singular
Available online 31 October 2008 stress field in the neighborhood of the interfacial front of an adhesively bonded scarf joint is presented.
The plate is subjected to extension/bending (mode I) and in-plane shear/twisting (mode II) far field load-
Keywords: ing. Each material is assumed to be isotropic and elastic, but with different material properties. Numer-
Scarf joint ical results include the dependence of the lowest eigenvalue (or stress singularity) on the wedge aperture
Bimaterial interface angle of the plate material. Variation of the same with respect to the shear moduli ratio of the component
Three-dimensional
plate and adhesive layer materials is also an important part of the present investigation. Hitherto unob-
Stress singularity
Adhesive layer
served interesting and physically meaningful conclusions are also presented.
Free edge singularity Ó 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction failure modes at or near a scarf-bonded joint interface between

the plate material and the adhesive layer.
In structural applications such as aircraft, spacecraft, helicop- Three-dimensional bimaterial wedges of semi-circular cross-
ters, etc., load-bearing structural materials are increasingly being sections (or bimaterial half-spaces of finite thickness) are relevant
fastened by means of adhesively bonded joints. Often, the full to the analysis of scarf joint failure, caused by the presence of the
strength and stiffness characteristics of the material cannot be stress singularity at or near a scarf-bonded joint interface be-
transferred through the joint without a significant weight penalty. tween the plate material and the adhesive layer. Asymptotic
Thus, the issue of these joints is critical to the successful develop- behavior of two-dimensional stress fields at the tips of bimaterial
ment of modern structural technology. The scarf joint, the sche- wedges made of isotropic materials and subjected to far field
matic of which is shown in Figs. 1 and 2, is considered to provide Mode I, II or III loading, has been studied extensively in the liter-
a higher strength than a lap-shear joint [1], and is consequently ature; see e.g., Refs. [5,6]. The mathematical difficulties posed by
one of the most widely used configurations in load transfer [2]. Be- the three-dimensional bimaterial wedge problems are substan-
cause of its intrinsic characteristics, any bonded joint acts as a tially greater than their two-dimensional counterparts. A three-
stress raiser, characterized by highly three-dimensional stress dimensional eigenfunction approach has recently been developed
state coupled with high stress gradient and free edge stress singu- by Chaudhuri and Xie [7], and Chaudhuri [8] for understanding
larity [3]. Such effects have first been numerically inferred by Pipes the singular stress behavior in the vicinity of a point located at
and Pagano [4]; they are ultimately responsible for delamination the front of a crack and an anticrack, respectively. This has been
type joint failures [3]. A realistic analysis of these adhesively extended to determine the asymptotic stress fields in the neigh-
bonded materials must account for these adverse effects in order borhood of points located at the fronts of homogeneous and bima-
to insure integrity and design safety of structures. More important, terial pie-shaped wedges [9], and their special cases of bimaterial
as has rightly been pointed out by Wang and Yau [2], failure to in- interface cracks [10] and free edges [11]. The problems of three-
clude the ‘‘thin but critically important adhesive layer” in the scarf dimensional asymptotic stress field in the neighborhood of the
joint analysis should be fraught with uncertainty, because that front of bimaterial pie-shaped wedges of symmetric and unsym-
would result in potentially unsafe design practice. The primary metric geometrical configurations (with respect to the bimaterial
motivation of the present research stems from the need for under- interface) and subjected to antiplane shear far field loading have
standing the three-dimensional stress field in the vicinity of such also recently been solved by Xie and Chaudhuri [12], and Chiu
stress singularity, which results in localization of the catastrophic and Chaudhuri [13], respectively. More recently, solutions to the
problems of three-dimensional asymptotic stress fields in the
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 801 581 6282; fax: +1 801 581 4816. vicinity of the front of unsymmetric fiber-matrix pie-shaped
E-mail address: [email protected] (R.A. Chaudhuri). wedges formed as a result of matrix cracking or fiber break and

0263-8223/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2008.10.002
476 R.A. Chaudhuri, Sou-Hsiung Jack Chiu / Composite Structures 89 (2009) 475–483

z 2. Statement of the problem

Fig. 1 shows two pieces of a plate of width, 2 h, and thickness, d,

which are adhesively bonded by means of a scarf joint. The adhe-
sive layer is thin, yet its thickness is not negligible. As shown in
Fig. 2, this thin but important adhesive layer is bounded by the
lines AB and CD. The scarf-bonded plate is subjected to exten-
sion/bending (mode I) and in-plane shear/twisting (mode II) far
field loading. Each material is isotropic and elastic, but with differ-
2h x ent material properties. The semi-circular cross-section of a three-
dimensional bimaterial flat-wedge (or bimaterial half-space)
formed at point A of Fig. 2, made of plate (1) and adhesive layer
(2) materials, is shown schematically in Fig. 3. h1 denotes the
d wedge aperture angle of the plate material (1) at point A. h1 = p im-
plies a homogeneous half-space made of material 1 (plate mate-
rial) at point A, while h1 = 0 implies the same made of the
Fig. 1. Schematic of an adhesively bonded scarf joint. adhesive layer material (2) at the same point. The corresponding
material 1 wedge aperture angle at the point B is p  h1. The cylin-
drical polar coordinate system (r, h, z), is convenient to describe the
y deformation behavior of the bimaterial flat-wedge of width 2 h
(Figs. 1–3). Here, the z-axis is placed along the straight bimaterial
interface front (z 2 [h, h]), while the coordinates r, h, are used to
define the position of a point in the cross-sectional plane (see
Fig. 3). The scarf joint interface between the plate and adhesive
D B layer materials is located at h = h1 (Fig. 3). The components of the
displacement vector in the radial and tangential directions are rep-
resented by Ur, Uh, while the component in the z-direction is de-
noted by Uz. In the absence of body forces, the coupled partial
differential equations in terms of the displacement functions Ur,
d x
Uh, and Uz are given as follows [9–11]:
θ1 o2 U rj ðkj þ 2Gj Þ oU rj U rj Gj o2 U rj
ðkj þ 2Gj Þ þ  ðkj þ 2Gj Þ 2 þ 2
or 2 r or r r oh2
C A 2 2
ðkj þ Gj Þ o U hj ðkj þ 3Gj Þ oU hj o U rj
þ  þ Gj
Fig. 2. Geometry of a cross-section of a scarf-bonded plate. r oroh r2 oh oz2
2
o U zj
þ ðkj þ Gj Þ ¼ 0; ð1aÞ
oroz
subjected to Mode 1/II far field loading (extension/bending and in- ðkj þ Gj Þ o2 U rj ðkj þ 3Gj Þ oU rj o2 U hj
plane shear/twisting) have also become available in the literature þ þ Gj
r ohor r2 oh or 2
[14]. It may also be noted here that the above three-dimensional
oU hj U hj o2 U hj
eigenfunction expansion technique has also been utilized to com- þ Gj  Gj 2 þ ðkj þ 2Gj Þ
pute the asymptotic stress fields in the vicinity of fronts of penny
ror r r2 oh2
2 2
shaped cracks/anticracks weakening homogeneous and bimaterial o U hj ðkj þ Gj Þ o U zj
þ Gj þ ¼ 0; ð1bÞ
media [15,16], and thus establishing conceptual similarity of this oz2 r ohoz
class of problems with their through-thickness counterparts. In
addition, the three-dimensional singular stress fields near a par-
tially debonded cylindrical rigid fiber [17], and in the vicinity of
the circumferential tip of a fiber-matrix interfacial debond y
[18,19] have also been derived using the same afore-mentioned
three-dimensional eigenfunction expansion technique. Finally,
the three-dimensional asymptotic stress field in the vicinity of
the line of intersection of a circular cylindrical through/part-
through open/rigidly plugged hole and a plate [20] has also been
derived using the same three-dimensional eigenfunction expan-
(2) (1)
sion technique.
The above review reveals that although significant progress has Bond r
recently been reported in regards to the three-dimensional Material
asymptotic stress field in the vicinity of a bimaterial interfacial θ
line (front) of singularity, the problem of three-dimensional stress θ1
x
field in the vicinity of an adhesively bonded scarf joint interface is
yet to be addressed in the literature, which is the primary objec-
tive of the present investigation. Additionally, numerical results
pertaining to the variation of the stress singularity with respect
z
to the materials’ shear moduli ratio as well as its dependence
on the wedge aperture angle of the plate material are also Fig. 3. Semi-circular cross-section of a three-dimensional bimaterial wedge (or
presented. bimaterial half-space) made of plate and adhesive layer materials.
 R.A. Chaudhuri, Sou-Hsiung Jack Chiu / Composite Structures 89 (2009) 475–483 477

o2 U rj ðkj þ Gj Þ oU rj ðkj þ Gj Þ o2 U hj ðkj þ Gj Þ dRrj ðkj þ 3Gj Þ d Rhj

2
ðkj þ Gj Þ þ þ p þ pRrj þ Gj
oroz r oz r ohoz r1 dr 1 r21 2
dr1
2
o U zj o2 U zj oU zj Gj dRhj Gj ðkj þ 2Gj Þ 2
þ ðkj þ 2Gj Þ þ Gj þ Gj þ  Rhj þ p Rhj
oz2 or 2 ror r 1 dr1 r 21 r 21
Gj o2 U zj
þ 2 ¼ 0; j ¼ 1; 2; ð1cÞ ðkj þ Gj Þ
r oh2 þ Gj Rhj þ pRzj ¼ 0; ð6bÞ
r1
where kj and Gj, j = 1 (= p), 2 (= a) are Lame’s coefficients for the mate- dRrj ðkj þ Gj Þ ðkj þ Gj Þ d Rzj
2

rial 1 (plate material) and material 2 (adhesive). The subscripts ‘‘p” ðkj þ Gj Þ þ Rrj þ pRhj þ ðkj þ 2Gj ÞRzj þ Gj 2
dr 1 r1 r1 dr1
and ‘‘a” refer to the plate and adhesive layer materials, respectively.
The correct solution must satisfy the governing partial differen- Gj dRzj Gj 2
þ þ p Rzj ¼ 0; ð6cÞ
tial equations and boundary conditions. The boundary conditions r 1 dr 1 r 21
include those at the bimaterial plate end-faces and flat-wedge-side where
surfaces (i.e., the bottom or top surface of the scarf-bonded plate).
r1 ¼ iar: ð7Þ
The boundary conditions at plate end-faces, z = ±h, are given by
rzj ¼ shzj ¼ srzj ¼ 0; j ¼ 1; 2: ð2Þ The system of coupled ordinary differential Eq. (6) can be solved
using the following infinite series [7–11]:
The stress-free boundary conditions, at the bottom surface of X
1
the scarf-bonded plate on either side of the line AB, are given as Rrj ¼ asjþn rsþ2n
1 ; ð8aÞ
follows: n¼0
X1
rh1 ¼ srh1 ¼ shz1 ¼ 0; h ¼ 0; ð3aÞ Rhj ¼ bsjþn rsþ2n
1 ; ð8bÞ
rh2 ¼ srh2 ¼ shz2 ¼ 0; h ¼ p: ð3bÞ n¼0
X1

Assuming that the scarfe joint interface is perfectly bonded, it is Rzj ¼ csjþn r sþ2nþ1
1 ; ð8cÞ
n¼0
easy to establish the continuity conditions of the stresses and dis-
placements along the bimaterial interface, h = h1, which are written where j = 1, 2, represents the component material.
as follows: On substitution of Eq. (8) into Eq. (6), a set of recurrent relation-
U h1 ¼ U h2 ; U r1 ¼ U r2 ; U z1 ¼ U z2 ; ð4aÞ ships can be derived. When n = 0, the characteristic equations for
rh1 ¼ rh2 ; srh1 ¼ srh2 ; shz1 ¼ shz2 : ð4bÞ the coupled differential equations are given by

The solution sought must satisfy the governing system of PDE’s

asj ½ðkj þ 2Gj Þðs2  1Þ þ Gj p2  þ bsj p½ðkj þ Gj Þs  ðkj þ 3Gj Þ ¼ 0; ð9aÞ
(1), boundary conditions (2) and (3), in addition to the bimaterial asj p½sðkj þ Gj Þ þ ðkj þ 3Gj Þ þ bsj ½Gj ðs2  1Þ þ ðkj þ 2Gj Þp2  ¼ 0: ð9bÞ
interface continuity conditions (4).
The above equations are found to have four imaginary roots:

3. Singular stress fields in the vicinity of an adhesively bonded p1;2 ¼ iðs þ 1Þ; p3;4 ¼ iðs  1Þ: ð10Þ
scarf joint interface front
The final results that satisfy the equilibrium Eq. (1) can be ex-
pressed in the following form:
The assumed displacement functions for the three-dimensional
adhesively bonded scarf joint (bimaterial flat-wedge or half-space) U rj ¼ U rj1 þ U rj2 ; U hj ¼ U hj1 þ U hj2 ; U zj ¼ U zj1 þ U zj2 ; ð11Þ
interface problem under consideration are selected on the basis of
where
separation of variables, as given below [7–11]:
U rj1 ¼ Isj ðD1j i sinðazÞ þ D2j cosðazÞÞðA1j sinðs þ 1Þh þ A2j
U rj ðr; h; zÞ ¼ eiaz /r ðhÞRrj ðrÞ ¼ eiazþph Rrj ðrÞ; ð5aÞ
U hj ðr; h; zÞ ¼ eiaz /h ðhÞRhj ðrÞ ¼ eiazþph Rhj ðrÞ; ð5bÞ  cosðs þ 1ÞhÞ; ð12aÞ

U zj ðr; h; zÞ ¼ eiaz /z ðhÞRzj ðrÞ ¼ eiazþph Rzj ðrÞ; ð5cÞ

U hj1 ¼ Isj ðD1j i sinðazÞ þ D2j cosðazÞÞðA1j cosðs þ 1Þh  A2j
in which j = 1 (plate) and 2 (adhesive material). It may be noted that  sinðs þ 1ÞhÞ; ð12bÞ
since the z-dependent term and its first partial derivative can either
be bounded and integrable at most admitting ordinary discontinu-  cosðazÞ þ D
 i sinðazÞÞðA
 1j sinðs þ 1Þh þ A
 2j
ities, or the first partial derivative at worst be square integrable (in U zj1 ¼ Isjþ1 ðD1j 2j

the sense of Lebesgue integration) in its interval z 2 [h, h], i.e.,  cosðs þ 1ÞhÞ; ð12cÞ
admitting singularities weaker than square root (i.e., z(1/2 + e), and
e > 0, it can be best represented by Fourier series [14]. The latter
case is justified by the Riesz–Fischer theorem [21], and its physical U rj2 ¼ Isj1 ðD1j i sinðazÞ þ D2j cosðazÞÞ
implication is that of satisfying the criterion of finiteness of local
 ðA3j sinðs  1Þh þ A4j cosðs  1ÞhÞ; ð13aÞ
strain energy and path independence [22]. Substitution of Eq. (5)
into Eq. (1) yields the following system of coupled ordinary differ- U hj2 ¼ Isj2 ðD1j i sinðazÞ þ D2j cosðazÞÞ
ential equations (ODE’s):  ðA3j cosðs  1Þh  A4j sinðs  1ÞhÞ; ð13bÞ
2  cosðazÞ þ D  i sinðazÞÞ
d Rrj ðkj þ 2Gj Þ dRrj Rrj Gj U zj2 ¼ Isj3 ðD
ðkj þ 2Gj Þ 2
þ  ðkj þ 2Gj Þ 2 þ 2 p2 Rrj 1j 2j
dr 1 r1 dr1 r1 r1  ðA  3j sinðs  1Þh þ A 4j cosðs  1ÞhÞ: ð13cÞ
ðkj þ Gj Þ dRhj ðkj þ 3Gj Þ
þ p  pRhj Isj and Isj+1 are modified Bessel functions of the first kind. It may
r1 dr 1 r21
be noted that these Bessel functions are constructed here from
dRzj their respective series expansions. Isj1, Isj2, and Isj3 are in the form
þ Gj Rrj þ ðkj þ Gj Þ ¼ 0; ð6aÞ
dr 1 as given below:
478 R.A. Chaudhuri, Sou-Hsiung Jack Chiu / Composite Structures 89 (2009) 475–483

X
1
The fields of displacements and stresses can be written down in
Isj1 ¼ asjþ2n r 1sþ2n ; ð14aÞ
the form:
n¼0
X
1
rs 
Isj2 ¼ bsjþ2n r sþ2n
1 ; ð14bÞ U rj ¼ ðA1j ðzÞsinðs þ 1Þh þ A2j ðzÞcosðs þ 1ÞhÞ
2Gj s
n¼0
X
1 þ ðs  3 þ 4mj ÞðA3j ðzÞsinðs  1Þh þ A4j ðzÞcosðs  1ÞhÞ þ Oðr sþ2 Þ;
Isj3 ¼ csjþ2n r1sþ2nþ1 : ð14cÞ
ð23aÞ
n¼0
rs 
The general recurrent relationship for the coefficients, asj, bsj, csj, U hj ¼ ðA1j ðzÞ cosðs þ 1Þh  A2j ðzÞsinðs þ 1ÞhÞ
2Gj s
is given by
þ ðs þ 3  4mj ÞðA3j cosðs  1Þh  A4j sinðs  1ÞhÞ þ Oðr sþ2 Þ; ð23bÞ
asjþ2n ½ðkj þ 2Gj Þðs þ 2n þ 1Þðs þ 2n  1Þ  Gj ðs  1Þ2  
rrj ¼ rs1 ðA1j ðzÞsinðs þ 1Þh þ A2j ðzÞcosðs þ 1ÞhÞ
 bsjþ2n ðs  1Þ½ðkj þ Gj Þðs þ 2nÞ  ðkj þ 3Gj Þ 
þ ðs  3ÞðA3j ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh þ A4j ðzÞcosðs  1ÞhÞ þ Oðrsþ1 Þ; ð23cÞ
þ asjþ2n2 Gj þ csjþ2n2 ðkj þ Gj Þðs þ 2n  1Þ ¼ 0; ð15aÞ 
asjþ2n ðs  1Þ½ðkj þ Gj Þ ðs þ 2nÞ þ ðkj þ 3Gj Þ rhj ¼ rs1 ðA1j ðzÞsinðs þ 1Þh þ A2j ðzÞ cosðs þ 1ÞhÞ
þ bsjþ2n ½Gj ðs þ 2n þ 1Þðs þ 2n  1Þ  ðkj þ 2Gj Þðs  1Þ2  þ ðs þ 1ÞðA3j ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh þ A4j ðzÞcosðs  1ÞhÞ þ Oðr sþ1 Þ; ð23dÞ

þ bsjþ2n2 Gj þ csjþ2n2 ðkj þ Gj Þðs  1Þ ¼ 0; ð15bÞ srhj ¼ rs1 ðA1j ðzÞcosðs þ 1Þh  A2j ðzÞsinðs þ 1ÞhÞ
asjþ2n ðkj þ Gj Þðs þ 2n þ 1Þ  bsjþ2n ðkj þ Gj Þðs  1Þ þ ðs  1ÞðA3j ðzÞ cosðs  1Þh  A4j ðzÞsinðs  1ÞhÞ þ Oðr sþ1 Þ; ð23eÞ
þ csjþ2n2 ðkj þ 2Gj Þ þ csjþ2n Gj ½ðs þ 2n þ 1Þ 2 rzj ¼ 4mj rs1 ðA3j ðzÞsinðs  1Þh þ A4j ðzÞ cosðs  1ÞhÞ þ Oðrsþ1 Þ; ð23fÞ
 ðs  1Þ2  ¼ 0: ð15cÞ U zj ¼ Oðr sþ1 Þ; srzj ¼ Oðrs Þ;shzj ¼ Oðrs Þ; ð23gÞ

The asymptotic forms of Eqs. (11), (12a), (12b), (12c), (13a), where
(13b), (13c) are given as follows: Gj sðiaÞs
 A1j;2j ðzÞ ¼  1j;2j ðzÞ;
A ð24aÞ
s s1
2  ðzÞ sinðs þ 1Þh þ A  2j ðzÞ cosðs þ 1ÞhÞ 2 Cðs þ 1Þ
U rj ¼ rs1 ðA
Cðs þ 1Þ 1j 2sGj ðkj þ Gj Þasj ðiaÞs 
þasj ðA  3j ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh þ A 4j ðzÞ cosðs  1ÞhÞ þ Oðr sþ2 Þ; ð16aÞ
A3j;4j ðzÞ ¼
ðkj þ Gj Þs  ðkj þ 3Gj Þ
A3j;4j ðzÞ: ð24bÞ
 s
2  ðzÞ cosðs þ 1Þh  A  2j ðzÞ sinðs þ 1ÞhÞ The expressions for stresses and displacements also need to sat-
U hj ¼ r s1 ðA
Cðs þ 1Þ 1j isfy continuity conditions at the scarf joint interface, given by Eq.
þf1j asj ðA 3j ðzÞ cosðs  1Þh  A  4j ðzÞ sinðs  1ÞhÞ þ Oðr sþ2 Þ; ð16bÞ (4), leading to the following four homogeneous linear algebraic
equations:
U zj ¼ Oðrsþ1 Þ; ð16cÞ
A11 ðzÞ sinðs þ 1Þh1 þ A21 ðzÞ cosðs þ 1Þh1
where þ ðs  k1 ÞfA31 ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh1 þ A41 ðzÞ cosðs  1Þh1 g
ðkj þ Gj Þs þ ðkj þ 3Gj Þ  k½A12 ðzÞ sinðs þ 1Þh1 þ A22 ðzÞ cosðs þ 1Þh1
f1j ¼ ; ð17Þ
ðkj þ Gj Þs  ðkj þ 3Gj Þ þðs  k2 ÞfA32 ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh1 þ A42 ðzÞ cosðs  1Þh1 g ¼ 0; ð25aÞ
and A11 ðzÞ cosðs þ 1Þh1  A21 ðzÞ sinðs þ 1Þh1
Aij ðzÞ ¼ Aij B1j ðzÞ; i ¼ 1; :::; 4 ð18Þ þ ðs þ k1 ÞfA31 ðzÞ cosðs  1Þh1  A41 ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh1 g
 k½A12 ðzÞ cosðs þ 1Þh1  A22 ðzÞ sinðs þ 1Þh1 þ ðs þ k2 Þ
with
fA32 ðzÞ cosðs  1Þh1  A42 ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh1 g ¼ 0; ð25bÞ
B1j ðzÞ ¼ D1j sinðazÞ þ D2j cosðazÞ; ð19Þ A11 ðzÞ sinðs þ 1Þh1 þ A21 ðzÞ cosðs þ 1Þh1
in which þ ðs þ 1ÞfA31 ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh1 þ A41 ðzÞ cosðs  1Þh1 g
 ½A12 ðzÞ sinðs þ 1Þh1 þ A22 ðzÞ cosðs þ 1Þh1
D1 ¼ iD1 ; D2 ¼ D2 : ð20Þ
þ ðs þ 1ÞfA32 ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh1 þ A42 ðzÞ cosðs  1Þh1 g ¼ 0; ð25cÞ
By using the stress-free boundary conditions at the end sur- A11 ðzÞ cosðs þ 1Þh1  A21 ðzÞ sinðs þ 1Þh1
faces, z = ±h, of the scarf-bonded plate, given by Eq. (2), the general
þ ðs  1ÞfA31 ðzÞ cosðs  1Þh1  A41 ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh1 g
form of B1j can be obtained. If even functions are selected from
B1j(z), it can yield the in-plane extension/bending case that satisfies  ½A12 ðzÞ cosðs þ 1Þh1  A22 ðzÞ sinðs þ 1Þh1
stress-free boundary conditions at z = ±h, as follows: þðs  1ÞfA32 ðzÞ cosðs  1Þh1  A42 ðzÞ sinðs  1Þh1 g ¼ 0; ð25dÞ
X
1   where
ð2m þ 1Þ
B1js ðzÞ ¼ D2mj cos pz ; j ¼ 1; 2; ð21Þ
kj ¼ 3  4mj ; j ¼ 1; 2; ð26Þ
m¼0
2h
and
If odd functions are selected from B1j(z), it can yield the torsion
case that satisfies stress-free boundary condition at z = ±h, as G1 Gp
k¼ ¼ : ð27Þ
follows: G2 Ga
X
1 mp  Additionally, the expressions for stresses also need to satisfy the
B1ja ðzÞ ¼ D1mj sin z ; j ¼ 1; 2: ð22Þ stress-free boundary conditions, at the bottom surface of the scarf-
m¼0
h
bonded plate on either side of the line AB. The eigenvalues, which
If the boundary conditions on the free plate faces are satisfied, are related to the strength of the stress singularity, can be obtained
all the stresses and displacements on the plate end-faces in the from these relations.
vicinity of the interfacial front of an adhesively-bonded scarf joint On substitution of Eq. (23) into the wedge-side free-free bound-
vanish in a manner similar to their bimaterial laminate free edge ary conditions given by Eq. (3), the following characteristic equa-
[11] counterparts. tions are obtained:
 R.A. Chaudhuri, Sou-Hsiung Jack Chiu / Composite Structures 89 (2009) 475–483 479

A21 ðzÞ þ ðs þ 1ÞA41 ðzÞ ¼ 0; ð28aÞ 1.0

A11 ðzÞ þ ðs  1ÞA31 ðzÞ ¼ 0; ð28bÞ
A12 ðzÞ sinðspÞ  A22 ðzÞ cosðspÞ þ ðs þ 1Þ
 ðA32 ðzÞ sinðspÞ  A42 ðzÞ cosðspÞÞ ¼ 0; ð28cÞ 0.9

A12 ðzÞ cosðspÞ þ A22 ðzÞ sinðspÞ þ ðs  1Þ θ 1=15 o

 ðA32 ðzÞ cosðspÞ þ A42 ðzÞ sinðspÞÞ ¼ 0: ð28dÞ
0.8
The eigen-equations, that result from the above system of eight

Re (s)
homogeneous algebraic equations, given by Eqs. (25) and (28), can
be written down into the form: 0.7
½DðsÞfAij ðzÞg ¼ 0: ð29Þ
The existence of a nontrivial solution for Aij (z) requires vanish-
0.6
ing of the coefficient determinant
jDðsÞj ¼ 0: ð30Þ
D(s) is a 8  8 matrix involving s in a transcendental form. 0.5
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
log k
4. Numerical results and discussions
Fig. 4. Variation of the real part of the lowest eigenvalue, for a scarf joint interface
Plates made of metals (e.g., Ti, Al, Mg, etc.), ceramics (e.g., SiC, (h1 = 15°, h2 = 165°), with respect to log k.
WC, Al2O3) and other materials are adhesively scarf-bonded by
means of resins, such as epoxy (typical Young’s modulus, E = 3–
6 GPa, m = 0.38) [23]. Table 1 lists the shear moduli, Gp and shear singularity or the vulnerability of this scarf joint to premature fail-
moduli ratio, k, of some common metals and ceramics [23,24]. Var- ure can be reduced by replacing the intermediate shear modulus
iation of the lowest eigenvalue, s, with respect to the shear moduli epoxy adhesive layer with either some lower end shear modulus
ratios, k = G1/G2, for various h1 is illustrated in Figs. 4–9. As has also epoxy (Ga  1.1 GPa) or higher end shear modulus epoxy (Ga 
been noted earlier, the corresponding material 1 wedge aperture 2.2 GPa). k = 100 may also correspond to a ceramic, such as WC
angle at the point B is p  h1. In each of these plots (Figs. 4–9), (Gp = 219 GPa), plate scarf-bonded by means of some higher end
the left half (i.e., k < 1 or log k < 0) represents the stress state at C shear modulus epoxy adhesive layer (Ga  2.2 GPa). Again, Fig. 4
(of Fig. 2), while the right half (i.e., k > 1 or log k > 0) depicts the suggests that the order of stress singularity or the vulnerability
same at A (see Fig. 2). The same is true for Fig. 10. For Figs. 4–10, of this scarf joint to premature failure can be reduced by replacing
m1 = m2 = 0.2 has been used. the higher end shear modulus epoxy adhesive layer with some
Fig. 4 shows that for h1 = 15°, the computed lowest eigenvalue, s intermediate range to lower end shear modulus epoxy.
(or Re s), stays constant at s = 1 up to log k = 0 (i.e., k = 1), and then Fig. 5 similarly shows that for h1 = 30°, the computed lowest
monotonically decreases or the order of stress singularity, k = 1 – s, eigenvalue, s (or Re s), stays constant at s = 1 up to log k = 0 (i.e.,
monotonically increases with k = G1/G2 = Gp/Ga for values of k = 1), and then monotonically decreases or the order of stress sin-
1 < k < 100 (Approx.). At k = 100 (approx.), the order of stress sin- gularity, k = 1 – s, monotonically increases with k = G1/G2 = Gp/Ga
gularity, k = 0.404, and thereafter, s monotonically increases (or for values of 1 < k < 25 (Approx.). At k = 25 (approx.), the order of
k = 1  s monotonically decreases) with k from k = 100 to stress singularity, k = 0.281, and thereafter, s monotonically in-
k = 851.25. Shear moduli ratio, k = 100 physically corresponds to creases (or k = 1  s monotonically decreases) with k from k = 25
a ceramic, e.g., SiC (Gp = 167 GPa) or Al2O3 (Gp = 152 GPa), or a me- to k = 75.5. Shear moduli ratio, k = 25 physically corresponds to a
tal, such as W (Gp = 160.6 GPa), plate scarf-bonded by means of metal, such as Nb (Gp = 37.5 GPa), plate scarf-bonded by means
some intermediate shear modulus epoxy adhesive layer of some intermediate shear modulus epoxy adhesive layer
(1.1 Gpa < Ga < 2.2 GPa). Fig. 4 suggests that the order of stress (1.1 GPa < Ga < 2.2 GPa). As stated above, Fig. 5 suggests that the

Table 1
Elastic properties of some commonly used metals and ceramics [23,24]

Plate material Young’s modulus (Ep) (Gpa) Poisson’s ratio (mp) Shear modulus (Gp) (Gpa) Shear moduli ratio, k
Aluminum (Al) 70.3 0.345 26.1 11.86–23.73
Cadmium (Cd) 49.9 0.30 19.2 8.73–17.46
Chromium (Cr) 279.1 0.21 115.4 52.46–104.91
Copper (Cu) 129.8 0.343 48.3 21.96–43.91
Iron (Fe) 211.4 0.293 81.6 37.09–74.18
Magnesium (Mg) 44.7 0.291 17.3 7.86–15.73
Nickel (Ni) 199.5 0.312 76.0 34.55–69.09
Niobium (Nb) 104.9 0.397 37.5 17.05–34.09
Titanium (Ti) 115.7 0.321 43.8 19.91–39.82
Tungsten (W) 411.0 0.28 160.6 73.0–146.0
Vanadium (Va) 127.6 0.365 46.7 21.23–42.46
Alumina (Al2O3) 380.0 0.25 152 69.1–138.2
Borosilicate glass 64.0 0.21 26.5 12.0–24.0
Glass (Heavy Flint) 80.1 0.27 31.5 14.32–28.64
Quartz (Fused) 73.1 0.17 31.2 14.18–28.36
Silicon carbide (SiC) 400.0 0.20 166.7 75.8–151.6
Tungsten carbide (WC) 534.4 0.22 219.0 99.55–199.09
480 R.A. Chaudhuri, Sou-Hsiung Jack Chiu / Composite Structures 89 (2009) 475–483

1.1

1.0

Re (s)
0.9 o
θ1 = 60

0.8

0.7
-4 -2 0 2 4
log k

Fig. 7. Variation of the real part of the lowest eigenvalue, for a scarf joint interface
(h1 = 60°, h2 = 120°), with respect to log k.

1.1

o
θ 1 = 75
1.0

Fig. 5. Variation of the real part of the lowest eigenvalue, for a scarf joint interface
Re (s)

(h1 = 30°, h2 = 150°), with respect to log k.

0.9

1.00

0.8

0.95

0.7
-4 -2 0 2 4
θ 1 = 45 o
Re (s)

log k
0.90
Fig. 8. Variation of the real part of the lowest eigenvalue, for a scarf joint interface
(h1 = 75°, h2 = 105°), with respect to log k.

0.85
suggests that the order of stress singularity or the vulnerability
of this scarf joint to premature failure can be reduced by replacing
the lower end shear modulus epoxy adhesive layer with some
intermediate range to higher end shear modulus epoxy.
0.80
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 Similar behavior continues as h1 is increased at an interval of
log k 15° to 45°, shown in Fig. 6. The computed lowest eigenvalue, s
(or Re s), stays constant at s = 1 up to log k = 0 (i.e., k = 1), and then
Fig. 6. Variation of the real part of the lowest eigenvalue, for a scarf joint interface monotonically decreases, or the order of stress singularity k = 1  s
(h1 = 45°, h2 = 135°), with respect to log k. monotonically increases, with k = G1/G2 = Gp/Ga for values of
1 < k < 8 (Approx.). At k = 8 (approx.), the order of stress singularity,
k = 0.13, and thereafter, s monotonically increases (or k = 1  s
order of stress singularity or the vulnerability of this scarf joint to monotonically decreases) with k from k = 8 to k = 16. Shear moduli
premature failure can be reduced by replacing the intermediate ratio, k = 8 may physically correspond to a metal, such as Mg
shear modulus epoxy adhesive layer with either some lower end (Gp = 17.3 Gpa), plate scarf-bonded by means of some higher end
shear modulus epoxy (Ga  1.1 GPa) or higher end shear modulus shear modulus epoxy adhesive layer (Ga  2.2 Gpa). Again, Fig. 6
epoxy (Ga  2.2 GPa). k = 25 may also correspond to a metal, such suggests that the order of stress singularity or the vulnerability
as Al (Gp = 26.1 GPa) or a ceramic such as borosilicate glass of this scarf joint to premature failure can be reduced by replacing
(Gp = 26.5 GPa), plate scarf-bonded by means of some lower end the higher end shear modulus epoxy adhesive layer with some
shear modulus epoxy adhesive layer (Ga  1.1 GPa). Again, Fig. 5 intermediate range to lower end shear modulus epoxy adhesive.
 R.A. Chaudhuri, Sou-Hsiung Jack Chiu / Composite Structures 89 (2009) 475–483 481

takes the appearance of a skewed bell-shaped curve. It shows that

for h1 = 75°, the computed lowest eigenvalue, s (or Re s), first
monotonically increases from the value of s = 0.881 at k = 0.001
to s = 1 at k = 1, or the order of stress singularity, k = 1 – s, mono-
tonically decreases from k = 0.119 at k = 0.001 to k = 0 at k = 1, be-
yond which s (or Re s) monotonically decreases to s = 0.726 at
k = 1000, or the order of stress singularity, k = 1 – s, monotonically
increases to k = 0.274 at k = 1000. The variation of the lowest
eigenvalue, s (or Re s), for the case of h1 = 90°, with respect to log
k, is shown in Fig. 9, which displays a symmetric bell-shaped curve.
Again, Figs. 8 and 9 indicate that the order of stress singularity or
the vulnerability of these scarf joints to premature failure increases
from typical metals, such as Al or W, being replaced by their cera-
mic counterparts, Al2O3 or WC, and/or from higher end shear mod-
ulus epoxy being replaced by its lower end counterpart.
Fig. 10 summarizes the results displayed in Figs. 4–9. Plots for
90° < h1 < 180° are not displayed here, because these can easily
be obtained by mirror imaging the corresponding p  h1 curves.
For example, plots of s vs. log k for h1 = 105°, 120°, 135°, 150°,
165°, which represent the stress states at B and D (of Fig. 2), can
easily be obtained by flipping the corresponding curves, that repre-
sent the stress states at A and C, for h1 = 75°, 60°, 45°, 30°, 15°,
shown in Figs. 4–9, about their respective vertical axes (ordinates).
Again, in each of these mirror-flipped plots (mirror images of Figs.
Fig. 9. Variation of the real part of the lowest eigenvalue, for a scarf joint interface
4–10), the left half (i.e., k < 1 or log k < 0) represents the stress state
(h1 = 90°, h2 = 90°), with respect to log k. at D, while the right half (i.e., k > 1 or log k > 0) depicts the same at
B (see Fig. 2).
Fig. 11 exhibits the variation of the computed lowest eigen-
value, s (or Re s), with respect to log k, for three combinations of
Poisson’s ratios of the plate and the adhesive layer. These curves
are identical to their counterparts for a (i) free surface of a plate
reinforced with an uncapped inclusion [25], and (ii) bimaterial
plate weakened by an open hole [26] under extension/bending. It
is interesting to observe that the bell-shaped curve is symmetric
when both the layer materials have the same Poisson’s ratios, as
has been shown earlier in Fig. 9. Furthermore, the computed eigen-
value decreases with the increase of the Poisson’s ratio. It is further
interesting to note that the computed s vs. log k plot, for the case
m1 = 0.2, m2 = 0.3, is an unsymmetric (skewed) bell curve, which fol-
lows the m1 = m2 = 0.2 curve for k 6 1, while following the
m1 = m2 = 0.3 curve for k P 1. Such a combination of Poisson’s ratios
typically represent a ceramic such as SiC being adhesively scarf-
bonded by means of an epoxy-like resin. The computed eigenvalue,
s, drops very rapidly from s = 1 at k = 1 with both the increase and

Fig. 10. Summary of variations of the real part of the lowest eigenvalue, for scarf
joint interfaces (h1 = 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 75°, 90°, h2 = 120°  h1), with respect to log k.

Fig. 7 suggests a transition in regards to the variation of the

computed lowest eigenvalue, s (or Re s), with respect to log k. It
shows that for h1 = 60°, the computed lowest eigenvalue, s (or Re
s), stays constant at s = 1 up to log k = 0 (i.e., k = 1), and then mono-
tonically decreases or the order of stress singularity, k = 1 – s,
monotonically increases with k = G1/G2 = Gp/Ga for values of
1 < k < 3000 (Approx.). At k = 3000 (approx.), the order of stress
singularity, k = 0.289. Fig. 7 reveals that the order of stress singu-
larity or the vulnerability of this scarf joint to premature failure in-
creases from typical metals, such as Al or W, being replaced by
their ceramic counterparts, Al2O3 or WC, and/or from higher end
shear modulus epoxy being replaced by its lower end counterpart.
Fig. 8 indicates a drastic change in regards to the variation of the Fig. 11. Variation of the lowest eigenvalue, for a scarf joint interface (h1 = 90°,
computed lowest eigenvalue, s (or Re s) with respect to log k, which h2 = 90°), with respect to log k, for various combinations of Poisson’s ratios.
482 R.A. Chaudhuri, Sou-Hsiung Jack Chiu / Composite Structures 89 (2009) 475–483

decrease of k, which means that the order of stress singularity in- with m1. The opposite is true for m2 P 0.25, in which case the s vs. m1
creases very rapidly with the increase/decrease of k in the range of plots register a monotonic decrease with the increase of m1.
102 6 k 6 102. The increase of the computed order of stress singu-
larity slows down beyond this range, finally reaching a plateau on 5. Summary and conclusions
either tail-end.
The variation of the lowest eigenvalue, s (or Re s), for h1 = 90°, A recently developed three-dimensional eigenfunction expan-
with respect to Poisson’s ratio, m = m1 = m2, for different values of sion approach for prediction of the singular stress field in the
k, is displayed in Fig. 12. The order of stress singularity, k = 1  s, neighborhood of the interfacial front of an adhesively bonded scarf
continues to rise monotonically all the way to its highest values joint is presented. The plate is subjected to extension/bending
at m = 0.5. The variation of the lowest eigenvalue, s (or Re s), for (mode I) and in-plane shear/twisting (mode II) far field loading.
h1 = 90°, with respect to plate material Poisson’s ratio, m1, is dis- Each material is assumed to be isotropic and elastic, but with dif-
played in Fig. 13 for various values of adhesive layer Poisson’s ratio, ferent material properties. Numerical results include the depen-
m2, with k = 5. It is noteworthy that s (Re s) decreases with the in- dence of the lowest eigenvalue (or stress singularity) on the
crease of m2, for all values of m1. Furthermore, for m2 = 0.05, s (or Re wedge aperture angle of the plate material. Variation of the same
s) first increases with m1 up to m1 = 0.3, where it reaches a plateau at with respect to the shear moduli ratio of the component plate
s = 1. For m2 = 0.1, 0.15, 0.2, s (or Re s) exhibits monotonic increase and adhesive layer materials is also an important part of the pres-
ent investigation. Important conclusions drawn from this study’s
numerical results can be listed as follows:

(i) Numerical results show that for the adhesive layer wedge
Free-Free
aperture angle in the range, 0° < h1 6 60°, the stress singular-
1.0 ity at the scarf joint interfacial front vanishes for all values of
k = G1/G2 = Gp/Ga, while for 60° < h1 6 90°, the stress singu-
larity at the scarf joint interfacial front increases with the
increase of h1, and decreases with the increase of the shear
modulus ratio, k = G1/G2 = Gp/Ga, until it vanishes at k = 1.
0.8 (ii) Numerical results show that for the plate material wedge
s

aperture angle in the range, 0° < h1 6 45°, the stress singular-

k= 1
ity at the scarf joint interfacial front increases with k = G1/
k = 1.25
G2 = Gp/Ga, up to k = 100, 25, 8 for h1 6 15°, 30°, 45°, respec-
tively, and thereafter, it monotonically decreases. Further-
0.6
k = 2.5
more, the stress singularity at the scarf joint interfacial
k = 10 front increases with the decrease of h1. The plate material
wedge aperture angle h1 = 60°, represents a transition, where
k= 5 k = 100
the order of stress singularity, k = 1 – s, monotonically
0.4 increases with k = G1/G2 = Gp/Ga for values of 1 < k < 3000
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 (Approx.). For 60° < h1 6 90°, the stress singularity at the
ν1 = ν2 scarf joint interfacial front increases with the increase of
Fig. 12. Dependence of the lowest eigenvalue, for a scarf joint interface (h1 = 90°,
the shear modulus ratio, k = G1/G2 = Gp/Ga.
h2 = 90°), on Poisson’s ratio, m = m1 = m2, for various shear moduli ratios, k = G1/G2. (iii) For both adhesive layer and plate material wedge aperture
angles in the range of 90° < h1 < 180°, the stress singularity,
k = 1 – s, vs. shear moduli ratio, k, plots can be obtained by
mirror imaging the corresponding p  h1 curves.
1.15 (iv) The variation of the lowest eigenvalue, s (or Re s), for the
ν 2 = 0.0 5 ν 2 = 0.2 ν 2 = 0.3
case of h1 = 90°, with respect to log k, displays a symmetric
bell-shaped curve when the Poisson’s ratios of both the plate
ν 2 = 0.1 ν 2 = 0.3 5
ν 2 = 0.2 5 and adhesive layer materials are the same. Furthermore, the
1.05 computed stress singularity increases with the increase of
ν 2 = 0.5
ν 2 = 0.1 5 the Poisson’s ratio. h1 = h2 = 90° represents a special case of
the scarf joint interface, and corresponds to the bimaterial
laminate free edge studied earlier [11].
0.95
s

References

[1] Bikerman JJ. The science of adhesive joints. New York: Academic Press; 1968. p.
0.85 234–5.
[2] Wang SS, Yau JF. Interfacial cracks in adhesively bonded scarf joints. AIAA J
1981;19:1350–6.
Free-Free
[3] Stenger F, Chaudhuri R, Chiu J. Sinc solution of boundary integral form for two-
k= 5 dimensional bi-material elasticity problems. Compos Sci Technol
2000;60:2197–211.
0.75 [4] Pipes RB, Pagano NJ. Interlaminar stresses in composite laminates under
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
uniform axial extension. J Compos Mater 1970;4:538–48.
ν1 [5] Leguillon D, Sanchez-Palencia E. Computation of singular solutions in elliptic
problems and elasticity. New York: Wiley; 1987.
Fig. 13. Variation of the lowest eigenvalue, for a scarf joint interface (h1 = 90°, [6] Chaudhuri RA, Xie M, Garala HJ. Stress singularity due to kink band weakening
h2 = 90°), with respect to the plate material Poisson’s ratio, m1, for k = 5, and various a unidirectional composite under compression. J Compos Mater
adhesive layer Poisson’s ratios, m2. 1996;30:672–91.
 R.A. Chaudhuri, Sou-Hsiung Jack Chiu / Composite Structures 89 (2009) 475–483 483

[7] Chaudhuri RA, Xie M. A novel eigenfunction expansion solution for three- [17] Chaudhuri RA. Three-dimensional singular stress field near a partially
dimensional crack problems. Compos Sci Technol 2000;60:2565–80. debonded cylindrical rigid fiber. Compos Struct 2006;72:141–50.
[8] Chaudhuri RA. Eigenfunction expansion solutions for three-dimensional rigid [18] Chaudhuri RA. Three-dimensional asymptotic stress field in the vicinity of the
planar inclusion problem. Int J Fracture 2003;121:95–110. circumferential tip of a fiber-matrix interfacial debond. Int J Eng Sci
[9] Chaudhuri RA, Xie M. A tale of two saints: St. Venant and ‘‘St. Nick” – Does St. 2004;42:1707–27.
Venant’s principle apply to bimaterial straight edge and wedge singularity [19] Chaudhuri SN, Chaudhuri RA, Benner RE, Penugonda M. Raman spectroscopy
problems? Compos Sci Technol 2000;60:2503–15. for characterization of interfacial debonds between carbon fibers and polymer
[10] Xie M, Chaudhuri RA. Three-dimensional stress singularity at a bimaterial matrices. Compos Struct 2006;76:375–87.
interface crack front. Compos Struct 1998;40:137–47. [20] Chaudhuri RA. Three-dimensional asymptotic stress field in the vicinity of the
[11] Chaudhuri RA, Xie M. Free-edge stress singularity in a bimaterial laminate. line of intersection of a circular cylindrical through/part-through open/rigidly
Compos Struct 1998;40:129–36. plugged hole and a plate. Int J Fracture 2003;122:65–88.
[12] Xie M, Chaudhuri RA. Three-dimensional asymptotic stress field at the front of [21] Carslaw HS. Introduction to the theory of Fourier series and integrals. 3rd
a bimaterial wedge of symmetric geometry under antiplane shear loading. ed. New York: Dover; 1930.
Compos Struct 2001;54:509–14. [22] Wilcox CH. Uniqueness theorems for displacement fields with locally finite
[13] Chiu JSH, Chaudhuri RA. Three-dimensional asymptotic stress field at the front energy in linear elastostatics. J Elasticity 1979;9:221–43.
of an unsymmetric bimaterial pie-shaped wedge under antiplane shear [23] Hull D, Clyne TW. An introduction to composite materials. 2nd ed. Cambridge,
loading. Compos Struct 2002;58:129–37. UK: Cambridge University Press; 1996.
[14] Chaudhuri RA, Chiu SHJ. Three-dimensional asymptotic stress field at the front [24] Hertzberg RW. Deformation and fracture mechanics of engineering materials.
of an unsymmetric bimaterial wedge associated with matrix cracking or fiber 4th ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.; 1996.
break. Compos Struct 2007;78:254–63. [25] Chaudhuri RA. Three-dimensional asymptotic stress field in the vicinity of the
[15] Chaudhuri RA. Three-dimensional asymptotic stress field in the vicinity of the line of intersection of an inclusion and plate surface. Int J Fracture
circumference of a penny shaped discontinuity. Int J Solids Struct 2003;119:195–222.
2003;40:3787–805. [26] Chaudhuri RA. An eigenfunction expansion solution for three-dimensional
[16] Chaudhuri RA. Three-dimensional asymptotic stress field in the vicinity of the stress field in the vicinity of the circumferential line of intersection of a
circumference of a bimaterial penny shaped interface discontinuity. Int J bimaterial interface and a hole. Int J Fracture 2004;129:361–84.
Fracture 2006;141:211–25.