INTERNATIONAL ISO

STANDARD 25217

First edition
2009-05-01

Adhesives — Determination of the

mode 1 adhesive fracture energy of
structural adhesive joints using double
cantilever beam and tapered double
cantilever beam specimens
Adhésifs — Détermination de l'énergie de fracture adhésive en mode 1
des adhésifs structurels utilisant des éprouvettes de rayon de cantilever
double et des éprouvettes de rayon de cantilever double effilées

Reference number
ISO 25217:2009(E)

© ISO 2009
ISO 25217:2009(E)

PDF disclaimer
This PDF file may contain embedded typefaces. In accordance with Adobe's licensing policy, this file may be printed or viewed but
shall not be edited unless the typefaces which are embedded are licensed to and installed on the computer performing the editing. In
downloading this file, parties accept therein the responsibility of not infringing Adobe's licensing policy. The ISO Central Secretariat
accepts no liability in this area.
Adobe is a trademark of Adobe Systems Incorporated.
Details of the software products used to create this PDF file can be found in the General Info relative to the file; the PDF-creation
parameters were optimized for printing. Every care has been taken to ensure that the file is suitable for use by ISO member bodies. In
the unlikely event that a problem relating to it is found, please inform the Central Secretariat at the address given below.

COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT

© ISO 2009
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from either ISO at the address below or
ISO's member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
Case postale 56 • CH-1211 Geneva 20
Tel. + 41 22 749 01 11
Fax + 41 22 749 09 47
E-mail [email protected]
Web www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland

ii © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

Contents Page

Foreword............................................................................................................................................................ iv
1 Scope ..................................................................................................................................................... 1
2 Normative references ........................................................................................................................... 1
3 Symbols and abbreviated terms ......................................................................................................... 1
4 Principle ................................................................................................................................................. 3
5 Apparatus .............................................................................................................................................. 3
6 Specimens ............................................................................................................................................. 3
6.1 Number of specimens .......................................................................................................................... 3
6.2 Conditioning.......................................................................................................................................... 4
6.3 Manufacture of adhesive joint specimens ......................................................................................... 4
6.4 Measurement of specimen dimensions.............................................................................................. 6
6.4.1 DCB substrates ..................................................................................................................................... 6
6.4.2 TDCB substrates................................................................................................................................... 6
6.4.3 DCB and TDCB substrates .................................................................................................................. 6
6.5 Preparation of specimens .................................................................................................................... 7
7 Procedure .............................................................................................................................................. 7
7.1 Test set-up and data recording ........................................................................................................... 7
7.2 Initial loading (the precracking stage) ................................................................................................ 7
7.3 Re-loading: Testing from the mode I precrack .................................................................................. 8
7.4 Measurement of machine compliance................................................................................................ 9
8 Data analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 9
8.1 Determination of the raw data from the load-displacement trace ................................................... 9
8.1.1 General................................................................................................................................................... 9
8.1.2 Initiation values..................................................................................................................................... 9
8.1.3 Propagation values............................................................................................................................. 10
8.2 Determination of GIC ........................................................................................................................... 10
8.2.1 General................................................................................................................................................. 10
8.2.2 Double cantilever beam (DCB) .......................................................................................................... 10
8.2.3 Tapered double cantilever beam (TDCB) ......................................................................................... 12
9 Test report ........................................................................................................................................... 13
9.1 Test report for the DCB test............................................................................................................... 13
9.2 Test report for the TDCB test ............................................................................................................ 14
Annex A (informative) Measurement of test system compliance................................................................ 16
Annex B (normative) Procedure to follow when unstable or “stick-slip” crack growth is observed
during the fracture test....................................................................................................................... 18
Annex C (normative) Procedure to detect the occurrence of plastic deformation during a DCB or
TDCB adhesive joint test ................................................................................................................... 19
Annex D (informative) Summary of background theory............................................................................... 20
Bibliography ..................................................................................................................................................... 24

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved iii

ISO 25217:2009(E)

Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards bodies
(ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through ISO
technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee has been
established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations, governmental and
non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely with the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.

International Standards are drafted in accordance with the rules given in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.

The main task of technical committees is to prepare International Standards. Draft International Standards
adopted by the technical committees are circulated to the member bodies for voting. Publication as an
International Standard requires approval by at least 75 % of the member bodies casting a vote.

Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent
rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.

ISO 25217 was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 61, Plastics, Subcommittee SC 2, Mechanical
properties.

iv © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO 25217:2009(E)

Adhesives — Determination of the mode 1 adhesive fracture

energy of structural adhesive joints using double cantilever
beam and tapered double cantilever beam specimens

1 Scope
This International Standard specifies a method, based upon linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM), for the
determination of the fracture resistance of structural adhesive joints under an applied mode I opening load,
using double cantilever beam (DCB) and tapered double cantilever beam (TDCB) specimens.

2 Normative references
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For dated
references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced
document (including any amendments) applies.

ISO 291, Plastics — Standard atmospheres for conditioning and testing

ISO 10365, Adhesives — Designation of main failure patterns

3 Symbols and abbreviated terms

For the purposes of this International Standard, the following symbols and abbreviated terms apply:

A insert film length (mm), i.e. the distance between the end of the specimen and the tip of the
insert film (see Figure 1)

a crack length (mm), i.e. the distance between the load-line (intersection of plane through
pin-hole centres or centres of the hinge axes and plane of crack) and the tip of the precrack or
crack on the edge of the specimen (see Figure 1)

ap precrack length (mm), measured from the load-line to the tip of the mode I precrack

a0 insert film length (mm) between the load-line and the tip of the insert film (see Figure 1)

B width of the specimen (mm)

C compliance δ/P of the specimen (mm/N)

Ccs compliance of the calibration specimen used to measure the system compliance (mm/N)

Cmax compliance of the specimen at maximum load (mm/N)

Csy compliance of the tensile-loading system (mm/N)

Ctotal compliance of the tensile-loading system and the calibration specimen used to measure this
(mm/N) (see Annex A)

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 1

ISO 25217:2009(E)

C0 initial compliance of the specimen, neglecting start-up effects, e.g. due to play in the specimen
fixture (mm/N) (see Figure 2)

C0+5 % initial compliance of the specimen, C0, raised by a factor 1,05 (mm/N) (see Figure 2)

Ef flexural modulus of the arms of the substrate beam, calculated from the DCB mode I crack
propagation test (GPa)

Es independently measured flexural or tensile modulus of the arms of the substrate beam (GPa);
if the substrate is a fibre composite, Es is the longitudinal modulus of the material in the
direction of fibre alignment

F large-displacement correction

GIC critical strain energy release rate, or adhesive fracture energy, for the applied mode I opening
load (J/m2)

H thickness of the load-block (mm)

h thickness of the substrate beam at a crack length a (mm)

ha thickness of the adhesive layer (mm)

l total length of the specimen (mm)

l1 distance from the centre of the loading pin or of the piano hinge axis to the mid-plane of the
arm of the substrate beam to which the load-block or the piano hinge is attached (mm)
(see Figure 1)

l2 distance between the centre of the pin-hole in the load-block and the edge of the load-block,
measured towards the tip of the insert (starter film) or the tip of the mode I precrack (mm)
(see Figure 1)

l3 total length of the load-block (mm) (see Figure 1)

MAX/5 % either the maximum load on the load-displacement curve or the point of intersection of a
straight line with the load-displacement curve with the slope of the straight line corresponding
to C0+5 % (see Figure 2)

m specimen geometry factor [see Equation (1)]

N load-block correction

NL onset of non-linearity on the load-displacement curve (see Figure 2)

n slope of a plot of log10C versus log10a, or log10(C/N) versus log10a if load-blocks are being
used

P load measured by the load-cell of the test machine (N)

PROP increments of the crack length during stable crack growth (propagation) that are marked on
the load-displacement curve (see Figure 2)

r2 correlation coefficient of linear fits

r.h. relative humidity during the test (%)

VIS onset of visually recognizable crack growth at the edge of the specimen that is marked on the
load-displacement curve (see Figure 2)

2 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

∆ crack-length correction for a beam that is not perfectly built-in (mm)

δ displacement of the cross-head of the test machine (mm)

δcor displacement of the cross-head, corrected for system compliance effects (mm)

4 Principle
A double cantilever beam (DCB) specimen or a tapered double cantilever beam (TDCB) specimen is used to
determine the adhesive fracture energy, GIC, of structural adhesive joints.

Resistance to both crack initiation and propagation is determined. The resistance to crack initiation is
determined from both a non-adhesive insert placed in the adhesive layer and from a mode I precrack. The
resistance to crack propagation is determined from the mode I precrack. The adhesive fracture energy, GIC,
(also termed the critical strain energy release rate) for applied mode I loading is calculated and a
resistance-curve (R-curve), i.e. a plot of the value of GIC versus crack length, is determined.

5 Apparatus
5.1 Tensile-testing machine, capable of producing a constant cross-head displacement rate between
0,1 mm/min and 5 mm/min in displacement control. The test machine shall be equipped with

a) either a fixture to introduce the load to the pins inserted into the load-blocks or directly into the substrate
beams;

b) or grips to hold the piano hinges that allow rotation of the specimen end (see Figure 1).

The test machine shall incorporate a load-cell that shall be calibrated and be accurate to within ± 1 % in the
chosen load-range.

NOTE Loads are typically expected to be in the range of 100 N to 5 000 N.

The opening displacement of the test specimen shall be deduced from the position of the cross-head. The test
machine shall be equipped with means for recording the complete load versus displacement curves (loading
and unloading) during the test.

5.2 Travelling microscope or video camera, with suitable magnification, capable of measuring the crack
length along the edge of the specimen to an accuracy of at least ± 0,5 mm.

5.3 Micrometer or vernier calipers, capable of measuring the thickness of the substrate arms and bonded
joints with an accuracy of at least ± 0,02 mm.

5.4 Micrometer or vernier calipers, capable of measuring the width of the joints with an accuracy of at
least ± 0,05 mm.

5.5 Typewriter correction fluid (“white ink”) or white spray-paint.

6 Specimens

6.1 Number of specimens

A minimum of four joints shall be tested.

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 3

ISO 25217:2009(E)

6.2 Conditioning

Most adhesives will absorb small quantities of water from the atmosphere which may have a significant
influence on the measured properties. Following specimen preparation, the adhesive will generally be dry. If
testing is carried out within a few days of specimen manufacture, then it is not necessary to condition the
specimen under controlled humidity since negligible absorption of water will take place in the thin adhesive
layer. However, if the specimen is tested after longer times or if the influence of absorbed water on the
properties is of interest, then the humidity shall be controlled by conditioning and the properties will depend on
the conditioning time.

In addition, if composite substrates are used, then it may be important to dry these prior to manufacture of the
joint. The properties of some adhesives are very sensitive to the presence of small amounts of moisture in a
substrate prior to curing. The drying out of the substrates prior to cure will ensure that the integrity of the
adhesive joint is not influenced by pre-bond moisture effects.

6.3 Manufacture of adhesive joint specimens

The DCB specimen shall be as shown in Figures 1 a), 1 b) or 1 c). The TDCB specimen shall be as shown in
Figure 1 d).

The thickness of the film to be inserted in the adhesive layer during manufacture shall be less than 13 µm.
The film shall be non-stick. A PTFE film is recommended. If aluminium foil is used, the foil shall be coated with
a release agent prior to use. Appropriate surface treatments for metallic substrates can be found in
ISO 17212 [1].

The thickness of the adhesive layer shall be carefully controlled and shall be less than 1 mm (see Notes 1
and 2). The thickness of the layer shall not vary by more than 20 % within a joint, nor shall the average
thickness of the layer in one joint differ by more than 20 % from that in another joint in the sample. When fully
cured, remove any excess adhesive by mechanical means that do not weaken the bond, so as to leave the
joint with smooth sides.

It should be recognized that the value of GIC measured from these tests will depend upon the thickness of the
adhesive layer in the joint. The value of the layer thickness shall be determined by the user, based upon the
adhesive manufacturer's recommendations or upon consideration of the intended application.

It is not within the scope of this International Standard to specify full manufacturing details of the joints to be
tested. Such information should be sought from the adhesive manufacturer and/or the substrate manufacturer.

NOTE 1 The analysis used here assumes that the adhesive layer makes a negligible contribution to the overall
compliance of the joint. In round-robin studies and supporting tests, values of ha from 0,1 mm to 1,0 mm have been used
with acceptable results. Values of ha > 1,0 mm may be used, but the validity of the analysis has not been demonstrated for
these thicker layers.

NOTE 2 For some toughened adhesives, the value of GIC determined by this method has been shown to be a strong
function of the thickness of the adhesive layer, ha. As a result, careful consideration is required when selecting the value of
ha. For the selection of ha, it is instructive to determine the size of the plastic zone ahead of the crack tip. The radius of this
zone, rp, may be approximated for the conditions of plane stress (as exists at the edges of the joint) and plane strain (as
exists in the central part of the joint) as follows:

1 ⎛⎜ E aGIC ⎞
⎟ 1 ⎛⎜ E aG IC ⎞
⎟
rp = (plane stress); rp = (plane strain)
2π ⎜ σ y 2 ⎟ 6π ⎜ σ y 2 ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠

where Ea and σy are Young's modulus and the yield strength of the adhesive, respectively. Kinloch and Shaw [4] argued
that, as the value of rp was greater at the edges of the joint, where plane stress conditions exist, then the plane stress
value was more applicable to the direct comparison with the adhesive layer thickness, ha. If ha << 2rp, then the plastic
zone may be largely suppressed and a low value of GIC would be anticipated. If ha ≈ 2rp, then the value of GIC may reach
a maximum, as shown in Reference [4], as the plastic zone fully develops and potentially distorts due to the presence of
the nearby adhesive-substrate interface. If ha > 2rp, then the value of GIC would be expected to become independent of ha,
which is the most desirable condition, subject to the constraint imposed by Note 1 above.

4 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

a) DCB specimen with load-blocks

b) DCB specimen with piano hinges (alternative loading arrangement)

c) DCB specimen with metallic substrates where loading holes may be

drilled through the arms of the substrate (alternative loading arrangement)

Figure 1 (continued on next page)

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 5

ISO 25217:2009(E)

d) TDCB specimen
Key
1 substrates
2 adhesive
NOTE The crack length, a, is the distance between the load-line (intersection of the plane through the pin-hole
centres or the hinge axes and the plane of crack) and the tip of the precrack or crack on the edge of the specimen. The
value of h is the thickness of a substrate arm. For the TDCB specimen, the value of h is a function of the crack length, a.

Figure 1 — Geometry of adhesive joint specimens

6.4 Measurement of specimen dimensions

6.4.1 DCB substrates

Measure the thickness of each DCB substrate using a micrometer (5.3) before bonding. Make the
measurements at three points along the length of the beam, at 30 mm from either end, and at the mid-length.
Calculate the mean value of the thickness of each substrate, h. Determine the thickness of the adhesive layer,
ha, by subtracting the substrate thicknesses, 2h, from the total thickness of the joint.

6.4.2 TDCB substrates

Measure the thickness of each TDCB substrate using vernier calipers or a micrometer (5.3) before bonding.
Make the measurements at three points along the contoured section of the beam, at 30 mm from either end
and at the mid-length of the contoured section. Measure the crack length at each of these positions. Calculate
m from Equation (1) (see Annex D).

3a 2 1
+ =m (1)
3 h
h

Repeat the measurements of the total beam thickness after bonding. Determine the adhesive layer thickness,
ha, by subtracting the substrate thicknesses, 2h (measured at the locations described), from the total thickness
of the joint at each of the three locations.

6.4.3 DCB and TDCB substrates

Remove any excess adhesive from the sides of the beam. After bonding, measure the width of the DCB or
TDCB joint with vernier calipers or a micrometer at three points along the length of the beam, at 30 mm from
either end and at the mid-length. Calculate the mean value, B.

6 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

6.5 Preparation of specimens

Apply a thin layer of typewriter correction fluid (“white ink”), or white spray-paint, on the edges of the specimen
after conditioning to facilitate the detection of crack growth.

NOTE Some typewriter correction fluids and paints contain solvents which can harm the adhesive or the laminate
matrix material of a composite substrate. An aqueous solvent is usually preferred.

Apply marks every 1 mm from the tip of the insert or the mode I crack for at least the first 10 mm, then apply
marks every 5 mm. Apply marks for every 1 mm for the final 5 mm.

For the DCB test specimen, the extent of crack propagation should be approximately 65 mm, and for the
TDCB test specimen the extent of crack propagation should be approximately 100 mm.

7 Procedure

7.1 Test set-up and data recording

Perform the test at one of the temperatures specified in ISO 291 or at another temperature agreed between
the interested parties. After mounting the specimen in the fixture of the test machine, support the end of the
specimen, if necessary, to keep the beam orthogonal to the direction of the applied load. Record the load and
the displacement signals of the test machine, electronically or on a paper chart, throughout the test, including
the unloading cycle.

If using a tensile-testing machine with a paper chart recorder, the following ratios of cross-head speed to chart
speed are recommended:

a) when testing joints with metallic substrates, a ratio of about 1:100;

b) when testing joints with fibre-composite substrates, a ratio of about 1:10.

Measure the crack length along the edge of the specimen to an accuracy of at least ± 0,5 mm using either a
travelling microscope or a video camera with suitable magnification (5.2). If unstable crack growth followed by
arrest (“stick-slip”) is observed during any stage of the test, follow the procedure in Annex B.

7.2 Initial loading (the precracking stage)

For testing from the insert (starter film), load the specimen at a constant cross-head rate of

a) either 0,1 mm/min to 0,5 mm/min for joints prepared using metallic substrates;

b) or 1,0 mm/min to 5,0 mm/min for joints prepared using fibre-composite (with polymeric matrix) substrates.

NOTE Lower values are more accurate for crack-length measurement. Fibre-composite refers to a material with
unidirectional, continuous fibres of carbon or glass in a polymer matrix with the fibre axis along the length of the specimen.

Record the point on the load-displacement curve at which the onset of crack movement from the insert is
observed on the edge of the specimen on the load-displacement curve or in the sequence of
load-displacement signals [VIS in Figure 2 a)].

Stop the loading as soon as the crack is seen to move on the edge of the specimen. Completely unload the
specimen at a constant cross-head rate of up to five times the loading rate. Mark the position of the tip of the
precrack on both edges of the specimen. If the crack lengths, a, on the edges of the specimen, i.e. the
distance between the load-line and the tip of the precrack, differ by more than 2 mm, consider the results to be
suspect and abandon the test.

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 7

ISO 25217:2009(E)

7.3 Re-loading: Testing from the mode I precrack

For testing from the mode I precrack which has been formed as a result of the test procedure in 7.2, load the
specimen at a constant cross-head rate of

a) either 0,1 mm/min to 0,5 mm/min for joints prepared using metallic substrates;

b) or 1,0 mm/min to 5,0 mm/min for joints prepared using fibre-composite (with polymeric matrix) substrates.

NOTE Lower values are more accurate for crack-length measurement.

Record, on the load-displacement curve or in the sequence of load-displacement signals, the point at which
the onset of crack movement from the insert is observed to occur [VIS in Figure 2b)].

a) Testing from the insert with initiation b) Testing from the mode I precrack with initiation points
points NL, VIS and MAX/5 % NL, VIS and MAX/5 % and propagation points (PROP)
Key
X displacement, δ
Y load, P
1 initiation values
2 propagation values
NOTE This figure shows an example where the MAX and the 5 % offset points coincide such that they lie on the
same point on the curve. This is not generally the case. Usually, these points will be separated. The MAX/5 % point is
assigned to the point C0+5 % or MAX, whichever occurs first.

Figure 2 — Schematic load-displacement curve for the DCB test (see Note)

After this, note as many crack-length increments as possible in the first 5 mm on the corresponding
load-displacement curves, ideally every 1 mm. Subsequently, note crack lengths at every 5 mm, until the
crack has propagated about 60 mm from the tip of the mode I precrack for the DCB test and about 95 mm for
the TDCB test. Note every 1 mm for the last 5 mm of crack propagation. Record a minimum number of fifteen
propagation points.

Next, unload the specimen at a constant cross-head rate of up to five times the loading rate. Record whether
the load-displacement curve returns to its initial point and, if not, follow the procedure in Annex C.

NOTE This might indicate that permanent plastic deformation of the arms of the specimen has occurred.

8 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

Mark the position of the tip of the crack, i.e. mark the distance between the load-line and the tip of the crack
on both edges of the specimen. If the crack lengths, a, on each of the two edges of the specimen, i.e. the
distance between the load-line and the tip of the crack, differ by more than 2 mm, abandon the test.

NOTE This might indicate asymmetric loading or other problems with the test.

Break the joints open to enable the locus of joint failure to be visually assessed. Visually assess the locus of
joint failure in accordance with ISO 10365.

7.4 Measurement of machine compliance

If the stiffness of the tensile-testing machine together with its associated grips and pins is not known,
determine the compliance associated with the machine set-up as specified in Annex A. Take the compliance
into account in the calculations presented in Clause 8, unless extensometry is used to measure the opening
displacement of the specimen during the test, when the system compliance correction described in Annex A
shall be neglected. Conduct the system compliance measurement after the fracture tests have been
conducted so that the maximum load obtained from the fracture tests, and hence the load range over which
the system compliance is to be measured, is known. Correct the displacement measured during the DCB or
TDCB test to take account of the deflections in the loading system. For each test, use the corrected values of
the displacement in the calculations.

If an extensometer attached to the specimen or loading pins is used to measure the displacement, then the
system compliance correction is not made.

8 Data analysis

8.1 Determination of the raw data from the load-displacement trace

8.1.1 General

Disregard any initial non-linearity in the load-displacement trace by extrapolating the linear region of the
loading curve back to zero load, as described in Annexes A and C. Determine initiation values (see 8.1.2) and
propagation values (see 8.1.3) from the load-displacement trace.

8.1.2 Initiation values

Determine the crack length for the initiation values from the insert as the distance between the load-line and
the tip of the insert, a0. Determine the crack length for the initiation values from the precrack as the distance
between the load-line and the tip of the precrack, ap (see Figure 1). Determine the following initiation values,
shown in Figure 2, for testing from the insert (starter film) and from the mode I precrack for each specimen:

a) NL: Determine the point of deviation from linearity by drawing a straight line from the origin, ignoring any
initial deviations due to take-up of play in the loading system. Perform a linear fit on the load-
displacement curve, starting at 5 % of the maximum load, using a consistent criterion for deviation from
linearity (e.g. the half-thickness of the plotter trace).

NOTE A region of non-linear behaviour usually precedes the maximum load, even if the unloading curve is linear.
Experience has shown that it is difficult to determine reproducibly the position of NL on the load-displacement curve.

b) VIS: Determine the first point at which the crack is observed to move from the tip of the insert or of the
mode I precrack on the edge of the specimen.

c) MAX/5 %: Determine the 5 % value as that point on the load-displacement curve at which the compliance
has increased by 5 % of its initial value, C0, as follows. Draw a best straight line to determine the initial
compliance, C0, ignoring any initial deviation due to take-up of play in the loading system, and draw a new
line with a compliance equal to C0+5 %. Mark the intersection of this new line with the load-displacement
trace. Use whichever point occurs first, i.e. the maximum load (MAX) or the load at 5 % increase in the
initial compliance.

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 9

ISO 25217:2009(E)

8.1.3 Propagation values

Determine propagation values [PROP in Figure 2 b)] from the mode I precrack.

8.2 Determination of GIC

8.2.1 General

Employ all three analysis methods shown below for the given test geometry, unless unstable (“stick-slip”)
crack growth occurs, when only simple beam theory (SBT) is used (see Annex B).

8.2.2 Double cantilever beam (DCB)

8.2.2.1 Analysis method 1: Simple beam theory (SBT) (see Annex D)

Measure Es from an independent modulus test or quote it if a standard grade of material is used.

Calculate GIC from Equation (2) for the SBT method.

4 P 2 ⎛ 3a 2 1 ⎞ 4 P 2
G IC = ⎜ + ⎟= ⋅m (2)
E s B 2 ⎜⎝ h 3 h ⎟⎠ E s B 2

8.2.2.2 Analysis method 2: Corrected beam theory (CBT) (see Annex D)

NOTE 1 The simple beam theory expression for the compliance of a perfectly built-in DCB specimen will underestimate
the compliance as the beam is not perfectly built-in.

Treat the beam as containing a slightly longer crack length, (a + |∆|); find |∆| experimentally by plotting the
cube root of the compliance, C1/3, or the cube root of the normalized compliance, (C/N)1/3, if load-blocks are
being used, as a function of crack length, a [see Figure 3 a)]. The load-block correction, N, is described in
Equation (6).

Extrapolate a linear fit through the data in the plot to yield ∆ as the negative X-intercept. Use only the
propagation (PROP) values for the linear fits, i.e. exclude all the initiation values from the linear fits.

Calculate GIC using Equation (3) if piano hinges or drill holes are used to introduce the load, or Equation (4) if
load-blocks are used:

3P δ
G IC = .F (3)
(
2B a + ∆ )
3P δ F
G IC = . (4)
(
2B a + ∆ )
N

Calculate all applicable initiation and propagation values of GIC. The load-block correction, N, is only applied if
the specimen in Figure 1 a) is used.

NOTE 2 For piano hinges and for loading holes drilled directly though the substrate, N = 1. For loading holes drilled
directly though the substrate, l1 = 0. The large-displacement correction, F, becomes important if δ/a > 0,4. In Equations
(3) and (4), (7) and (8) and (9) and (10), Equation (3) or (7) or (9) is used if piano hinges or drill holes are used to
introduce the load [see Figures 1 b) and 1 c)] and Equation (4) or (8) or (10) is used if load-blocks are used (see
Figure 1 a).

10 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

Calculate the large-displacement correction, F, and the load-block correction, N, as shown in Equations (5)
and (6), respectively:

2
3 ⎛δ⎞ 3⎛l δ⎞
F = 1− − ⎜ 1 ⎟ (5)
10 ⎜⎝ a ⎟⎠ 2⎝ a2 ⎠

9⎡ ⎛l
3 2⎤ 2
⎛l ⎞ ⎞ l δ 9 ⎛δ⎞
N = 1 − ⎜ 2 ⎟ − ⎢1 − ⎜ 2 ⎟ ⎥ 1 − ⎜ ⎟ (6)
⎝ a ⎠ 8⎢ ⎝ a ⎠ ⎥ a 2 35 ⎝ a ⎠
⎣ ⎦

where

l1 is the distance from the centre of the loading pin to the mid-plane of the arm of the substrate beam to
which the load-block is attached;

l2 is the distance from the loading-pin centre to the edge of the block (see Figure 1).

Consider data with large-displacement corrections, F, < 0,9 as suspect.

NOTE 3 If the displacement correction, F, is < 0,9 then, ideally, the test specimen should be redesigned, e.g. with
thicker substrates, to reduce the required displacements and thus reduce the large-displacement correction factor.

Calculate the flexural modulus, Ef, as a function of the crack length, a, by using Equation (7) if piano hinges or
drill holes are used to introduce the load, or Equation (8) if load-blocks are used:

( )
3
8 a+ ∆
Ef = (7)
CBh 3

( )
3
8 a+ ∆
Ef = (8)
C
Bh 3
N

NOTE 4 This calculation is a useful check on the procedure as a value of the flexural modulus, Ef, independent of crack
length should be obtained.

If the maximum variation of Ef is more than 10 % of the average, consider the values of GIC as suspect.

The value Ef calculated from Equation (7) or (8) shall not be quoted as the modulus value and this value shall
not be used in Equation (2), which requires an independently measured or known value of the modulus to be
used.

8.2.2.3 Analysis method 3: Experimental compliance method (ECM) or Berry's method

(see Annex D)

Plot the logarithm of the compliance, or of the normalized compliance, C/N, if load-blocks are being used,
versus the logarithm of the crack length, a, as shown in Figure 3 b). Use only the propagation (PROP) values
for the linear fits, i.e. exclude all the initiation values from the regression analysis.

Use the slope, n, of this plot to calculate GIC. Use Equation (9) if piano hinges or drill holes are used to
introduce the load, or use Equation (10) if load-blocks are used.

nPδ
G IC = ⋅F (9)
2 Ba

nPδ F
G IC = ⋅ (10)
2 Ba N

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 11

ISO 25217:2009(E)

Calculate all applicable initiation and propagation values of GIC. The same large-displacement correction, F,
and load-block correction, N, if applicable, are used as for the corrected beam theory method (see 8.2.2.2).

8.2.3 Tapered double cantilever beam (TDCB)

8.2.3.1 Analysis method 4: Simple beam theory (SBT) (see Annex D)

Measure Es from an independent modulus test, or quote it if a standard grade of material is used.

Calculate GIC from Equation (2) for the simple beam theory (SBT) method given in 8.2.2.1.

In the test report, quote the value of m and the range of the crack lengths, a, for which this value of m is within
± 3 %.

Values of GIC calculated where the value of m is outside the range ± 3 % shall be considered suspect.

8.2.3.2 Analysis method 5: Corrected beam theory (CBT) (see Annex D)

Calculate GIC from Equation (11):

⎡ 1⎤
4P 2m ⎢ ⎛ 3 ⎞3⎥
G IC = ⎢1 + 0,43 ⎜ ma ⎟ ⎥ (11)
E sB 2 ⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎥
⎣ ⎦

8.2.3.3 Analysis method 6: Experimental compliance method (ECM) (see Annex D)

Calculate the value of the adhesive fracture energy, GIC, using Equation (12). Obtain the value of dC/da from
the slope of the straight line of C plotted against a, using only the propagation (PROP) values in the regression
analysis, i.e. excluding all initiation values from the linear fit.

NOTE For the TDCB geometry, when the values of C are plotted against the crack length, a, the resulting graph
should be linear since

P 2 dC
G IC = ⋅ (12)
2 B da

12 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

a) The correction for the corrected beam theory b) The slope n for the experimental compliance
(CBT) method for the DCB test specimen method (ECM) for the DCB test specimen
Key
X1 crack length, a
Y1 (C/N)1/3
X2 loga
Y2 log(C/N)
∆ X-axis intercept
n slope
1 initiation values
2 propagation values
NOTE The visual point is excluded from the linear regression analysis.

Figure 3 — Linear fits

9 Test report

9.1 Test report for the DCB test

The test report shall contain GIC from SBT (method 1), GIC from CBT (method 2) and GIC from ECM
(method 3) from Equations (2), (3) or (4) and (9) or (10), respectively, except when Annex B applies (i.e.
unstable or “stick-slip” crack propagation is observed), when only GIC from SBT (method 1) is obtained.

In addition, the following shall be included in the report:

a) the initiation points of GIC (NL, VIS or MAX/5 % — see Figure 2), obtained from both the insert (starter
film) and from the mode I precrack using the corresponding measured value of the crack length, a, i.e. a0
or ap;

b) the propagation values of GIC [PROP in Figure 2 b)], determined from the mode I precrack as a function
of crack length, a;

c) a resistance-curve (R-curve), i.e. GIC versus crack length, a (see Figure 4), showing all initiation and
propagation values (see Blackman, et al. [10]) from both the insert and the mode I precrack;

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 13

ISO 25217:2009(E)

d) the flexural modulus, Ef, of the substrate [from Equation (7) or (8)] (the flexural or tensile modulus, Es, of a
substrate arm shall also be independently measured, or quoted if a known standard grade of material is
employed, and the value recorded in the test report);

e) whether the locus of joint failure (see 7.3) is

1) cohesive, in the adhesive,

2) apparently interfacial along the adhesive/substrate interface,

or

3) cohesive, in the substrate.

If a mixture of such failure paths is seen, estimate and record the percentage of each type.

9.2 Test report for the TDCB test

The test report shall contain GIC from SBT (method 4), GIC from CBT (method 5) and GIC from ECM
(method 6) from Equations (2), (11) and (12), respectively, except when Annex B applies (i.e. unstable or
“stick-slip” crack propagation is observed), when only GIC from SBT (method 4) and GIC from CBT (method 5)
are obtained.

In addition, the following shall be included in the report:

a) the initiation points of GIC (NL, VIS or MAX/5 % — see Figure 2), obtained from both the insert (starter
film) and from the mode I precrack using the corresponding measured value of the crack length, a, i.e. a0
or ap;

b) the propagation values of GIC [PROP in Figure 2 b)], determined from the mode I precrack as a function
of crack length, a;

c) a resistance-curve (R-curve), i.e. GIC versus crack length, a, (see Figure 4), showing all initiation and
propagation values (see Blackman, et al. [10]) from both the insert and the mode I precrack;

d) the value of the slope, dC/da, of the graph of C versus a and the correlation coefficient, r2, for the graph;

e) whether the locus of joint failure (see 7.3) is

1) cohesive, in the adhesive,

2) apparently interfacial along the adhesive/substrate interface,

or

3) cohesive, in the substrate.

If a mixture of such failure paths is seen, estimate and record the percentage of each type.

14 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

Key
X crack length, a
Y GIC
1 lowest initiation point (lowest value among NL, VIS and MAX/5 % from insert or precrack)
2 other initiation points
3 initiation values
4 propagation values

For both DCB and TDCB specimens, the specimen type shall be stated.

Figure 4 — Schematic resistance-curve (R-curve) with GIC values for initiation (i.e. the lowest value
among NL, VIS and MAX/5 %) and for propagation (PROP) versus observed crack length, a

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 15

ISO 25217:2009(E)

Annex A
(informative)

Measurement of test system compliance

CAUTION — Ensure that this procedure is carried out by experienced personnel, otherwise damage to
equipment can occur when the calibration specimen is loaded.

NOTE 1 It has been observed from round-robin testing that this correction procedure can have a significant effect on
the shape of the R-curves and on the values of the back-calculated modulus in the DCB tests.

The apparatus specified in 5.1 shall be used. Set up the tensile-loading system in exactly the manner that was
used for the fracture testing. Define the calibration load, Pcal, as the maximum load during fracture testing.

Connect a rigid calibration specimen of known compliance, Ccs, to the loading system. If pins of circular
cross-section were used to load the fracture specimens, use these to load the calibration specimen.

NOTE 2 A calibration specimen made from mild steel with cross-sectional dimensions of 20 mm by 25 mm and a
distance between loading-hole centres of 25 mm has been found to work satisfactorily and will possess a compliance
which is usually negligible when compared to the system compliance, Csy.

Start to load the specimen at a very slow rate, e.g. 0,05 mm/min, up to the calibration load value, Pcal. If using
a chart recorder to monitor displacement, run this at 100 times the rate of the cross-head. When the load
reaches the value of Pcal, stop the cross-head and unload the sample.

NOTE 3 The load will rise rapidly during this procedure, so care should be taken not to overload the load-cell.

Draw the best straight line through the linear part of the load-displacement trace obtained, thus ignoring the
initial non-linearity due to take up of play, as shown in Figure A.1.

NOTE 4 This take up of play is also ignored in the fracture tests.

Deduce the total compliance, Ctotal, of the combined system and calibration specimen (in mm/N) from this
straight line, as shown in Figure A.1.

NOTE 5 Ctotal = δcal/Pcal

Calculate the value Csy (in mm/N) from Equation (A.1):

C sy = C total − C cs (A.1)

Correct all the displacement values measured during the fracture tests, i.e. at each value of the crack length
that was recorded, using Equation (A.2):

δ cor = δ − PC sy (A.2)

where

δcor is the corrected value of the displacement (in mm) to be used in the equations in Clause 8;

δ is the value of the displacement (in mm) measured in the fracture tests;

P is the corresponding load.

16 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

Key
δe effective cross-head displacement (ignoring initial non-linearity due to take-up of play)

Figure A.1 — Schematic load-displacement trace obtained during

the system compliance measurement

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 17

ISO 25217:2009(E)

Annex B
(normative)

Procedure to follow when unstable or “stick-slip” crack growth is

observed during the fracture test

NOTE 1 It is not uncommon for adhesive joints to exhibit unstable or “stick-slip” crack propagation during a DCB or
TDCB fracture test. A schematic example of a load-displacement trace obtained from a TDCB joint exhibiting “stick-slip”
crack growth behaviour is shown in Figure B.1. During this type of propagation, the crack grows in short bursts separated
by periods of crack arrest. Sometimes the propagation is partly stable and partly unstable. The reasons for this type of
behaviour are not fully understood.

NOTE 2 When “stick-slip” crack propagation is observed during a DCB or TDCB test, it will not be possible to monitor
the crack propagation.

Observe the first initiation value of the crack length and the crack lengths at subsequent arrest points, using a
travelling microscope.

After the crack has propagated sufficiently down the specimen, fully unload the joint and record the unloading
trace recorded in the same way as for a stable test. Break the joint open to reveal arrest lines on the adhesive
so that more accurate crack-length measurements can be made.

NOTE 3 Between one arrest point and the next initiation point, the crack will remain stationary. There might be some
stable crack growth before further instability, or the crack might jump directly from the previous arrested value of the crack
length.

Record that “stick-slip” crack propagation was observed, and clearly indicate alongside each data point the
type of point, i.e. initiation or arrest, in the test report.

Do not average initiation and arrest values of GIC together. However, average values of GIC from the initiation
points and values of GIC from the arrest points can be deduced separately.

Key
X displacement (mm)
Y force (N)
i indicates initiation points
a indicates arrest points

Figure B.1 — Schematic force-displacement trace for a tapered double cantilever beam specimen
exhibiting unstable “stick-slip” crack growth behaviour

18 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

Annex C
(normative)

Procedure to detect the occurrence of plastic deformation during a DCB

or TDCB adhesive joint test

A schematic load-displacement trace obtained from testing a bonded tapered double cantilever beam
specimen is shown in Figure C.1. The complete load, propagation and unload cycle obtained during the test
from the mode I precrack is shown.

Draw the best straight lines through the data, for both the loading and unloading parts of the trace, ignoring
any initial non-linearity due to the take up of play in the system. Extrapolate the lines back to zero load.
Measure the values of the distance between the intercepts of these two lines with the displacement axis,
δoffset, and the maximum value of the displacement attained during the test, δmax.

NOTE 1 It is normal for the term δoffset to be non-zero.

Calculate the value of δoffset/δmax for each test and note this value on the results sheet.

Carefully break the joint open after the complete test cycle is finished. Visually determine whether plastic
deformation has occurred: plastic deformation of the substrate arms will have occurred if they remain
permanently deformed on separation. In the case of tapered-beam specimens, hold the substrates back
together as they were before separation.

Note the straightness of the beams after breaking open in the test report.

NOTE 2 Experience has shown that plastic deformation of the substrates can be suspected if δoffset/δmax > 0,05, where
δmax is the displacement required to extend the crack by the distance given in 7.3.

Key
X displacement (mm)
Y force (N)

Figure C.1 — Typical force-displacement trace for a tapered double cantilever beam specimen,
showing loading and unloading lines and the displacement offset

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 19

ISO 25217:2009(E)

Annex D
(informative)

Summary of background theory

D.1 General
The test methods specified in this International Standard enable the fracture resistance of structural adhesive
joints to be determined under mode I tensile-loading conditions. The use of either the double cantilever beam
(DCB) specimen or the tapered double cantilever beam (TDCB) specimen is accommodated.

The methods describe the measurement of the resistance both to crack initiation and to crack propagation
through the adhesive layer. Points of crack initiation are determined directly from an insert film, moulded into
the centre of the adhesive layer during joint manufacture, and from a mode I precrack created during the test.
The property measured by these methods is the mode I adhesive fracture energy, GIC. GIC may also be
described as the critical strain energy release rate, the energy release rate or the fracture toughness of the
joint.

The double cantilever beam (DCB) specimen is well suited for testing joints consisting of an adhesive bonding
relatively thin sheets of fibre-composite materials, but may also be used when metallic substrates, which
possess a relatively high yield stress, are employed [see e.g. Figure 1 c)].

The tapered double cantilever beam (TDCB) specimen is designed so that, over a large range of values of
crack length, the rate of change of compliance with crack length is constant and so is independent of the value
of the crack length. This is useful since

a) relatively tough adhesives can be tested without plastic deformation of the arms occurring;

b) the substrates can possess a relatively low yield stress, but again no plastic deformation of the arms is
encountered during the test;

c) the measurement of the adhesive fracture energy, GIC, is independent of the crack length, a.

There are three analysis methods for both the DCB test and the TDCB test. The corrected beam theory (CBT)
method and the experimental compliance method (ECM) are considered to be the more accurate methods for
determining the value of GIC.

NOTE DCB specimens are cheaper to manufacture, so are the test specimen of first choice provided plastic
deformation of the substrates is avoided. For tougher adhesives and substrates with lower yield stresses, i.e. in joints
more likely to violate LEFM test conditions, the TDCB is favoured.

To develop a linear change of compliance with crack length, the height of the specimen is varied by
contouring the substrate beam so that the specimen geometry factor, m, is a constant [see Equation (D.1)].

3a 2 1
+ =m (D.1)
3 h
h

where

a is the crack length;

h is the thickness of the substrate beam at crack length a.

20 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

The equations used to calculate the adhesive fracture energy, GIC, in the double cantilever beam (DCB) test
method (analysis methods 1 to 3) and in the tapered double cantilever beam (TDCB) test method (analysis
methods 4 to 6) are described here.

D.2 Analysis method 1: Simple beam theory (SBT) — Double cantilever beam (DCB)
The value of the adhesive fracture energy, GIC, is calculated using Equation (D.2):

P 2 dC
G IC = ⋅ (D.2)
2 B da

where

C is the compliance, given by δ/P;

B is the width of the specimen;

P is the load measured by the load-cell of the test machine.

For thin adhesive layers, it has been shown by Mostovoy, et al. [5] and Kinloch [6] that, from simple beam
theory, dC/da may be expressed as Equation (D.3):

dC 8 ⎛ 3a 2 1 ⎞
= ⎜ + ⎟ (D.3)
da E s B ⎜⎝ h 3 h ⎟⎠

where Es is the independently measured flexural or tensile modulus of the substrate.

By combining Equations (D.1), (D.2) and (D.3), Equation (D.4) is obtained and GIC can be calculated:

4 P 2 ⎛ 3a 2 1 ⎞ 4P 2
G IC = ⎜ + ⎟= ⋅m (D.4)
E s B 2 ⎜⎝ h 3 h ⎟⎠ E s B 2

D.3 Analysis method 2: Corrected beam theory (CBT) — Double cantilever beam
(DCB)
The simple beam theory expression for the compliance of a perfectly built-in DCB specimen will underestimate
the compliance as, in practice, the beam is not perfectly built-in (see Hashemi, et al. [7] and Blackman,
et al. [8]).

The adhesive fracture energy, GIC, is calculated using Equation (D.5) if piano hinges or drill holes are used to
introduce the load, or Equation (D.6) if load-blocks are used:

3 Pδ
G IC = ⋅F (D.5)
(
2B a + ∆ )
3 Pδ F
G IC = ⋅ (D.6)
(
2B a + ∆ ) N

where

N is a load-block correction;

F is a large-displacement correction;

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 21

ISO 25217:2009(E)

δ is the displacement;

∆ is a crack-length correction for a beam that is not perfectly built-in.

The large-displacement correction, F, and the load-block correction, N, are calculated as shown in
Equations (D.7) and (D.8), respectively (see Hashemi, et al. [7]):

2
3 ⎛δ ⎞ 3⎛l δ ⎞
F = 1− − ⎜ 1 ⎟ (D.7)
10 ⎜⎝ a ⎟⎠ 2⎝ a2 ⎠

9⎡ ⎛l ⎞ ⎤l δ
3 2 2
⎛l ⎞ 9 ⎛δ ⎞
N = 1 − ⎜ 2 ⎟ − ⎢1 − ⎜ 2 ⎟ ⎥ 1 − (D.8)
⎝ a ⎠ 8 ⎢ ⎝ a ⎠ ⎥ a 2 35 ⎜⎝ a ⎟⎠
⎣ ⎦

where

l1 is the distance from the centre of the loading pin to the mid-plane of the arm of the substrate beam to
which the load-block is attached;

l2 is the distance from the loading pin centre to the edge of the block (see Figure 1).

The flexural modulus, Ef, is calculated as a function of the crack length, a, by using Equation (D.9) if piano
hinges or drill holes are used to introduce the load, or Equation (D.10) if load-blocks are used:

( )
3
8 a+ ∆
Ef = (D.9)
CBh 3

( )
3
8 a+ ∆
Ef = (D.10)
C
Bh 3
N

This calculation is a useful check on the procedure, as a value of the flexural modulus Ef independent of crack
length should be obtained.

D.4 Analysis method 3: Experimental compliance method (ECM) or Berry's

method — Double cantilever beam (DCB)
The logarithm of the compliance, or of the normalized compliance, C/N, if load-blocks are being used, is
plotted against the logarithm of the crack length, a. The slope, n, of this plot gives GIC as follows:

nPδ
G IC = ⋅F (D.11)
2 Ba

nPδ F
G IC = ⋅ (D.12)
2 Ba N

The same large-displacement correction, F, and load-block correction, N, if applicable, are used as for the
corrected beam theory method.

22 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

 ISO 25217:2009(E)

D.5 Analysis method 4: Simple beam theory (SBT) — Tapered double cantilever
beam (TDCB)
This is the same as in analysis method 1, except the value of m is a constant for this particular geometry.

D.6 Analysis method 5: Corrected beam theory (CBT) — Tapered double cantilever
beam (TDCB)
The simple beam theory expression for GIC described in analysis method 4 will incorrectly estimate the
compliance of the specimen since:

a) the positions of the loading pins, with their surrounding material, are not taken into account in deriving
Equation (D.4);

b) as for the DCB specimen, the specimen does not behave as a perfectly built-in cantilever beam.

Corrections (see Blackman, et al. [9]) lead to Equation (D.13):

⎡ 1⎤
dC 8m ⎢ ⎛ 3 ⎞3⎥
= 1 + 0,43 ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ (D.13)
da E s B ⎢ ⎝ ma ⎠ ⎥
⎢
⎣ ⎦

Combining Equations (D.2) and (D.13), Equation (D.14) is obtained:

⎡ 1⎤
4P 2m ⎢ ⎛ 3 ⎞3⎥
G IC = ⎢1 + 0,43 ⎜ ma ⎟ ⎥ (D.14)
E sB 2 ⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎥
⎣ ⎦

In deriving Equation (D.13), the value of m is approximated to 3a2/h3, i.e. the term 1/h in Equation (D.1) is
neglected. The error in the value of GIC that is introduced by this approximation is insignificant, and
round-robin testing has demonstrated good agreement between the values of GIC deduced via
Equations (D.14) and (D.2) for tapered beams manufactured with aluminium alloy substrates (see Blackman,
et al. [10]).

D.7 Analysis method 6: Experimental compliance method (ECM) — Tapered double

cantilever beam (TDCB)
The adhesive fracture energy, GIC, is calculated using Equation (D.2), where the values of C plotted against
the crack length, a, produce a linear graph.

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved 23

ISO 25217:2009(E)

Bibliography

[1] ISO 17212, Structural adhesives — Guidelines for the surface preparation of metals and plastics prior
to adhesive bonding

[2] ISO 14125, Fibre-reinforced plastic composites — Determination of flexural properties

[3] ISO 6892-1, Metallic materials — Tensile testing — Part 1: Method of test at room temperature

[4] KINLOCH, A.J., and SHAW , S.J.: The fracture-resistance of a toughened epoxy adhesive, J. Adhesion,
12 (1981), pp. 59-77

[5] MOSTOVOY, S., CROSLEY, P.B., RIPLING, E.J.: Use of crack-line-loaded specimens for measuring
plane-strain fracture toughness, Journal of Materials, 2 (1967), pp. 661-681

[6] KINLOCH, A.J., Adhesion and Adhesives: Science and Technology, Chapman and Hall, London, 1987,
pp. 264-296

[7] HASHEMI, S., KINLOCH, A.J., W ILLIAMS, J.G.: The analysis of interlaminar fracture in uniaxial
fibre-polymer composites, Proc. R. Soc. Lond., A427 (1990), pp. 173-199

[8] BLACKMAN, B.R.K., DEAR, J.P., KINLOCH, A.J., OSIYEMI, A.: The calculation of adhesive fracture
energies from DCB test specimens, Journal of Materials Science Letters, 10 (1991), pp. 253-256

[9] BLACKMAN, B.R.K., HADAVINIA, H., KINLOCH, A.J., PARASCHI, M., W ILLIAMS, J.G.: The calculation of
adhesive fracture energies in mode I — Revisiting the tapered double cantilever beam (TDCB) test,
Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 70 (2003), pp. 233-248

[10] BLACKMAN, B.R.K., KINLOCH, A.J., PARASCHI, M., TEO, W.S.: Measuring the mode I adhesive fracture
energy, GIC, of structural adhesive joints — The results of an international round-robin, Int. J. Adhesion
and Adhesives, 23 (2003), pp. 293-305

24 © ISO 2009 – All rights reserved

ISO 25217:2009(E)

ICS 83.180
Price based on 24 pages

© ISO 2009 – All rights reserved