Sandwich composites are widely used in aviation, aerospace and marine engineering fields because of their excellent comprehensive properties. However, it is difficult to accurately predict the ultimate performance of sandwich composite structures because of their complex failure modes and uncoordinated damage processes. In this paper, the ultimate load, progressive failure process and failure mode of sandwich composite T-joints under three-point bending and lateral bending loads are predicted and verified by using an improved progressive damage analysis program. Moreover, the bio-inspired optimization of the composite T-joint is carried out, and the corner shape and material combination of the T-joint are designed and optimized based on the contour of the flange bone of the bird. The main factors affecting the bearing capacity of T-joint are further discussed, and a reasonable and feasible bio-inspired optimization scheme is obtained, which provides some reference for the design of marine composite T-joint.
MouritzAPGellertEBurchillP, et al.Review of advanced composite structures for naval ships and submarines. Compos Struct2001; 53: 21–42.
2.
ShenWYanRLuoB, et al.Ultimate strength analysis of composite typical joints for ship structures. Compos Struct2017; 171: 32–42.
3.
LiMYanRShenW, et al.Fatigue characteristics of sandwich composite joints in ships. Ocean Eng2022; 254: 111254.
4.
DharmawanFThomsonRSLiH, et al.Geometry and damage effects in a composite marine T-joint. Compos Struct2004; 66: 181–187.
5.
SlaterJE. Selection of a blast-resistant GRP composite panel design for naval ship structures- ScienceDirect. Mar Struct1994; 7: 417–440.
6.
GuoSLiW. Numerical analysis and experiment of sandwich T-joint structure reinforced by composite fasteners. Composites Part B2020; 199: 108288.
7.
KulkarniNMahfuzHJeelaniS, et al.Fatigue crack growth and life prediction of foam core sandwich composites under flexural loading. Compos Struct2003; 59(4): 499–505.
8.
CuiHLiYLiuY, et al.Numerical simulation of composites joints failure based on cohesive zone model. Acta Mater2010; 27(2): 161–168.
9.
ShinsakuHShuMNobuoT. Cure-induced strain and failure in deltoid of composite T joints. Compos Part A: Appl S2021; 141(1): 106210.
10.
FatihEOEmreCNuriE. Finite element analysis and acoustic emission monitoring of progressive failure of corrugated core composite structures. Compos Struct2020; 253: 112775.
11.
MoranoCTaoRWagihA, et al.Toughening effect in adhesive joints comprising a CFRP laminate and a corrugated lightweight aluminum alloy. Mater Today Commun2022; 32: 104103.
12.
ChenPYLinALinYS, et al.Structure and mechanical properties of selected biological materials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2008; 1(3): 208–226.
13.
MckittrickJChenPYTombolatoL, et al.Energy absorbent natural materials and bioinspired design strategies: a review. Mat Sci Eng R2010; 30(3): 331–342.
14.
MeyersMAChenPYLinYM, et al.Biological materials: structure and mechanical properties. Prog Mater Sci2008; 1: 208–226.
15.
JungniklKGoebbelsJBurgertI, et al.The role of material properties for the mechanical adaptation at branch junctions. Trees (Berl)2009; 23(1): 605–610.
16.
BurnsLAMouritzAPPookD, et al.Bio-inspired design of aerospace composite joints for improved damage tolerance. Compos Struct2012; 94(3): 995–1004.
17.
BurnsLAMouritzAPPookD, et al.Strength improvement to composite T-joints under bending through bio-inspired design. Compos Part A: Appl S2012; 43(11): 1971–1980.
ShaYRuihengYYaoH, et al.Toughening mechanism of coelacanth-fish-inspired double-helicoidal composites. Compos Sci Technol2021; 205: 108650.
20.
PuckASchürmannH. Failure analysis of FRP laminates by means of physically based phenomenological models. Compos Sci Technol2002; 62: 1633–1662.
21.
ShokriehMMLessardLPoonC. Three-dimensional progressive failure analysis of pin/bolt loaded composite laminates. AGARD (Advis Group Aerosp Res Dev) Conf Proc1996; ■■■: 1–7.
22.
LiuYLiMXLiQS, et al.Parameter optimization of L-joint of composite sandwich structure based on BP-GA algorithm. Compos Struct2022; 289: 115508.
23.
ZhaoLYangWCaoT, et al.A progressive failure analysis of all-C/SiC composite multi-bolt joints. Compos Struct2018; 202: 1059–1068.
24.
WangKLiuFHongH. Shear failure mechanisms and influences of overlaminate configuration on the failure of composite π joints. Results Phys2019; 12: 934–942.
25.
XuGQinKYanRJ, et al.Research on failure modes and ultimate strength behavior of typical sandwich composite joints for ship structures. Int J Nav Arch Ocean2018; 14: 100428.
26.
ZengHYYanRJXuL. Failure prediction of composite sandwich L-joint under bending. Compos Struct2018; 197: 54–62.
27.
QinKYanRJShenW, et al.Research on the tension damage behavior of sandwich composite L-joints: experiment and simulation. Compos Struct2020b; 232: 111566.
28.
TanSC. A progressive failure model for composite laminates containing openings. J Compos Mater1991; 25: 556–577.
29.
CamanhoPPMatthewsFL. A progressive damage model for mechanically fastened joints in composite laminates. J Compos Mater1999; 33: 2248–2280.
