{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/34403"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/34403","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Comparing In Situ and Bulk Constitutive Properties of a Structural Adhesive","abstract":"In the continuing quest for more efficient designs, structural adhesives are being used in place of, or with, traditional fastening methods; however designing with adhesives is refined as traditional methods. To obtain the adhesive design properties, tests are often performed on bulk tensile and bonded shear specimens. Questions remain about the relationship between properties obtained from in situ adhesive joints and bulk adhesive specimens. As a result, an experimental plan was developed which characterized both the linear and nonlinear region of bulk and in situ adhesive performance of a two-part acrylic adhesive from Dow Chemical Company. A standard uniaxial tensile test was used for the bulk normal, while an Iosipescu shear test was used to characterize the bulk shear performance. In situ testing was performed on a napkin-ring specimen loaded in both tension and torsion. Stress-strain relationships in both shear and normal were developed and bulk and in situ adhesive performance was compared. Observations from testing were: 1. Bulk shear and in situ shear tests showed similar performance in both the linear and nonlinear regions. 2. Modulus of elasticity in bulk adhesive tests was similar to the effective modulus of elasticity in in situ tests. 3. Prediction of normal yield strengths of the in situ adhesive through simple failure theory models proved to be inaccurate. Stress singularities, loading imperfections, and potentially a hydrostatic sensitivity were considered possible explanations. 4. Adhesive showed sensitivity to voiding and surface flaws when loaded in a tensile configuration, refinement of specimen fabrication minimized these effects.","abstract_html":"In the continuing quest for more efficient designs, structural adhesives are being used in place of, or with, traditional fastening methods; however designing with adhesives is refined as traditional methods. To obtain the adhesive design properties, tests are often performed on bulk tensile and bonded shear specimens. Questions remain about the relationship between properties obtained from in situ adhesive joints and bulk adhesive specimens. As a result, an experimental plan was developed which characterized both the linear and nonlinear region of bulk and in situ adhesive performance of a two-part acrylic adhesive from Dow Chemical Company. A standard uniaxial tensile test was used for the bulk normal, while an Iosipescu shear test was used to characterize the bulk shear performance. In situ testing was performed on a napkin-ring specimen loaded in both tension and torsion. Stress-strain relationships in both shear and normal were developed and bulk and in situ adhesive performance was compared. Observations from testing were: 1. Bulk shear and in situ shear tests showed similar performance in both the linear and nonlinear regions. 2. Modulus of elasticity in bulk adhesive tests was similar to the effective modulus of elasticity in in situ tests. 3. Prediction of normal yield strengths of the in situ adhesive through simple failure theory models proved to be inaccurate. Stress singularities, loading imperfections, and potentially a hydrostatic sensitivity were considered possible explanations. 4. Adhesive showed sensitivity to voiding and surface flaws when loaded in a tensile configuration, refinement of specimen fabrication minimized these effects.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Grohs, Joshua Walter"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Master of Science","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":"Mechanical Engineering","degree_department":"Mechanical Engineering","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["West, Robert L. Jr.","Dillard, David A."],"committee_members":["Mitchell, Larry D."],"year":2007,"date_issued":"2007-07-20","date_published":"2007-07-20","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:59Z","subjects":["napkin ring","bulk adhesive","mechanical properties","in situ adhesive","constitutive properties","iosipescu shear"],"languages":[],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-08072007-004210"],"render_values":[{"text":"etd-08072007-004210","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/34403","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["West, Robert L. Jr.","Dillard, David A."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Mitchell, Larry D."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Mechanical Engineering"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Grohs, Joshua Walter"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-03-14T20:42:58Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-03-14T20:42:58Z","2010-10-27"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2007-07-20"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Mechanical Engineering"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["napkin ring","bulk adhesive","mechanical properties","in situ adhesive","constitutive properties","iosipescu shear"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-08072007-004210"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/34403"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["In the continuing quest for more efficient designs, structural adhesives are being used in place of, or with, traditional fastening methods; however designing with adhesives is refined as traditional methods. To obtain the adhesive design properties, tests are often performed on bulk tensile and bonded shear specimens. Questions remain about the relationship between properties obtained from in situ adhesive joints and bulk adhesive specimens. As a result, an experimental plan was developed which characterized both the linear and nonlinear region of bulk and in situ adhesive performance of a two-part acrylic adhesive from Dow Chemical Company. A standard uniaxial tensile test was used for the bulk normal, while an Iosipescu shear test was used to characterize the bulk shear performance. In situ testing was performed on a napkin-ring specimen loaded in both tension and torsion. Stress-strain relationships in both shear and normal were developed and bulk and in situ adhesive performance was compared. Observations from testing were: 1. Bulk shear and in situ shear tests showed similar performance in both the linear and nonlinear regions. 2. Modulus of elasticity in bulk adhesive tests was similar to the effective modulus of elasticity in in situ tests. 3. Prediction of normal yield strengths of the in situ adhesive through simple failure theory models proved to be inaccurate. Stress singularities, loading imperfections, and potentially a hydrostatic sensitivity were considered possible explanations. 4. Adhesive showed sensitivity to voiding and surface flaws when loaded in a tensile configuration, refinement of specimen fabrication minimized these effects."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Comparing In Situ and Bulk Constitutive Properties of a Structural Adhesive"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["West, Robert L. Jr.","Dillard, David A."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Mitchell, Larry D."],"dc:contributor.department":["Mechanical Engineering"],"dc:creator":["Grohs, Joshua Walter"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-03-14T20:42:58Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-03-14T20:42:58Z","2010-10-27"],"dc:date.issued":["2007-07-20"],"dc:description.abstract":["In the continuing quest for more efficient designs, structural adhesives are being used in place of, or with, traditional fastening methods; however designing with adhesives is refined as traditional methods. To obtain the adhesive design properties, tests are often performed on bulk tensile and bonded shear specimens. Questions remain about the relationship between properties obtained from in situ adhesive joints and bulk adhesive specimens. As a result, an experimental plan was developed which characterized both the linear and nonlinear region of bulk and in situ adhesive performance of a two-part acrylic adhesive from Dow Chemical Company. A standard uniaxial tensile test was used for the bulk normal, while an Iosipescu shear test was used to characterize the bulk shear performance. In situ testing was performed on a napkin-ring specimen loaded in both tension and torsion. Stress-strain relationships in both shear and normal were developed and bulk and in situ adhesive performance was compared. Observations from testing were: 1. Bulk shear and in situ shear tests showed similar performance in both the linear and nonlinear regions. 2. Modulus of elasticity in bulk adhesive tests was similar to the effective modulus of elasticity in in situ tests. 3. Prediction of normal yield strengths of the in situ adhesive through simple failure theory models proved to be inaccurate. Stress singularities, loading imperfections, and potentially a hydrostatic sensitivity were considered possible explanations. 4. Adhesive showed sensitivity to voiding and surface flaws when loaded in a tensile configuration, refinement of specimen fabrication minimized these effects."],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Science"],"dc:identifier.other":["etd-08072007-004210"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/34403"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:subject":["napkin ring","bulk adhesive","mechanical properties","in situ adhesive","constitutive properties","iosipescu shear"],"dc:title":["Comparing In Situ and Bulk Constitutive Properties of a Structural Adhesive"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Mechanical Engineering"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Science"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:59Z"}