Loading…

Peel resistance of adhesive joints with elastomer–carbon black composite as surface sensing membranes

The peel resistance of four adhesives (“J-B Weld” by J-B Weld (adhesive A), 3M Scotch-Weld DP 125Gy (adhesive B), Loctite PL Premium (3x) Construction Adhesive (adhesive C), and Henkel Hysol EA9394 (adhesive D)) is investigated for their bonding performance of a styrene‐ethylene/butylene‐styrene– ca...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of adhesion and adhesives 2015-04, Vol.58, p.28-33
Main Authors: Zeng, Wei, Sun, Weixing, Bowler, Nicola, Laflamme, Simon
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The peel resistance of four adhesives (“J-B Weld” by J-B Weld (adhesive A), 3M Scotch-Weld DP 125Gy (adhesive B), Loctite PL Premium (3x) Construction Adhesive (adhesive C), and Henkel Hysol EA9394 (adhesive D)) is investigated for their bonding performance of a styrene‐ethylene/butylene‐styrene– carbon black (SEBS–CB) composite membrane used in structural health monitoring (SHM) applications. Tests are performed on membrane samples bonded on four common structural materials, namely aluminium, steel, concrete, and fiberglass, to obtain the peel resistance of adhesives. Results show that adhesive B has the highest strength for aluminium, steel, and fiberglass substrates, and that adhesive C has the highest strength for the concrete substrate. The performance is also evaluated versus adhesive cost, a critical variable in SHM applications. Here, adhesive C performed best for all substrates. Lastly, membrane residuals resulting from the peel tests are compared. Tests show that Adhesive B resulted in the highest residual percentage for aluminium, while adhesive C performed better for all other substrates. However, membrane residuals for adhesive C do not show a positive correlation with the peel resistance.
ISSN:0143-7496
1879-0127
DOI:10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2015.01.001