Submitted:
13 September 2023
Posted:
15 September 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.2. Methods
2.2.1. Laser metal surface pretreatment
2.2.2. Production of the single-lap shear (SLS) specimens
2.2.3. Single-lap shear tests of hybrid specimens
2.2.4. Quantification of remaining CFRP fragments on the fracture surfaces
2.2.5. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis of the fracture surfaces
3. Results
3.1. SLS strength of the hybrid AW 6082-T6 – CFRP specimens
3.2. Analysis of the fracture surfaces
4. Discussion
- I.
- Pretreatments R1 to R3 and R17 with mean SLS strengths of > 40 MPa before and > 35 MPa after hydrothermal aging,
- II.
- R18 and R19, which lead to SLS strengths up to 10 MPa before and after hydrothermal aging, and
- III.
- R34 to 36 specimens with less than 10 MPa before and negligible SLS strengths after hydrothermal aging.

5. Conclusions
- Similar to the AW 6082-T6 – E320 joints, the best-performing pulsed-laser pretreatments also resulted in the highest SLS strengths for the hybrid AW 6082-T6 – CFRP specimens. This is observed consistently before and after hydrothermal aging. High micro- and nano-surface enlargements are found to be particularly important, similar to the case of the metal-polymer joints.
- In contrast to the AW 6082-T6 – E320 bonding, whence even poorly-optimized laser pretreatments improved the joint properties, for hybrid aluminum-CFRP joining only well-optimized parameter sets increased the SLS strength. Contrary to the AW 6082-T6 – E320 case, some of the metal-CFRP specimens failed even before testing. The results indicate that for aluminum-CFRP joints a threshold value for the surface enlargement needs to be surpassed in order to achieve high SLS strengths.
- Hydrothermal aging shifts the failure from predominantly cohesive to an increasingly adhesive failure in the hybrid- and adhesively-bonded metal specimens. However, the change in the failure pattern does generally not translate into a major loss in joint strength.
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
| parameter set | microstructures [morphology] |
melt craters [depth] |
Nanostructures [density & height] | undercut structures |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 | ordered, groove-like | deepest | dense & medium | yes |
| R2 | complex, overlapping | deep | dense & large | yes |
| R3 | complex, overlapping | medium | dense & large | yes |
| R17 | complex, overlapping | medium | dense & medium | yes |
| R18 | complex, overlapping | medium | dense & small | yes |
| R19 | ordered, overlapping | shallow | dense & small | yes |
| R34 | ordered, without overlap | almost flat | sparse & small | negligible |
| R35 | ordered, without overlap | almost flat | sparse & small | negligible |
| R36 | ordered, without overlap | almost flat | dense & small | negligible |
References
- S. Da Kwon, S. H. Yoon, and H. Y. Hwang, “Effects of residual oils on the adhesion characteristics of metal-CFRP adhesive joints,” Composite Structures, vol. 207, pp. 240–254, 2019. [CrossRef]
- V. Reitz, D. Meinhard, S. Ruck, H. Riegel, and V. Knoblauch, “A comparison of IR- and UV-laser pretreatment to increase the bonding strength of adhesively joined aluminum/CFRP components,” Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, vol. 96, pp. 18–27, 2017. [CrossRef]
- H. Li, H. Liu, S. Li, Q. Zhao, and X. Qin, “Influence of high pulse fluence infrared laser surface pretreatment parameters on the mechanical properties of CFRP/aluminium alloy adhesive joints,” The Journal of Adhesion, vol. 99, no. 4, pp. 584–605, 2023. [CrossRef]
- Z. Zhang, J. Shan, X. Tan, and J. Zhang, “Improvement of the laser joining of CFRP and aluminum via laser pre-treatment,” Int J Adv Manuf Technol, vol. 90, 9-12, pp. 3465–3472, 2017. [CrossRef]
- 5. J. Schanz et al., “Comprehensive study on the influence of different pretreatment methods and structural adhesives on the shear strength of hybrid CFRP/aluminum joints,” The Journal of Adhesion, vol. 98, no. 12, pp. 1772–1800, 2022. [CrossRef]
- E. Akman, M. Ö. Bora, O. Çoban, and B. G. Oztoprak, “Laser-induced groove optimization for Al/CFRP adhesive joint strength,” International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives, vol. 107, p. 102830, 2021. [CrossRef]
- Trauth, C. Lohr, B. Lallinger, and K. A. Weidenmann, “Interface characterization of hybrid biocompatible fiber-metal laminates after laser-based surface treatment,” Composite Structures, vol. 281, p. 115054, 2022. [CrossRef]
- J. Schanz et al., “Adhesively bonded CFRP/Al joints: influence of the surface pretreatment on corrosion during salt spray test,” Materials & Corrosion, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 158–170, 2022. [CrossRef]
- M. Löbbecke, T. J. Bayerbasi, M. Bartsch, and J. Haubrich, “Role of surface structures on long term stability of adhesive joints between Ti–15V–3Cr–3Sn–3Al and polyether-ether-ketone,” International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives, vol. 120, p. 103282, 2023. [CrossRef]
- Baldan, “Adhesively-bonded joints in metallic alloys, polymers and composite materials: Mechanical and environmental durability performance,” Journal of Materials Science, vol. 39, no. 15, pp. 4729–4797, 2004. [CrossRef]
- J. Min, H. Wan, B. E. Carlson, J. Lin, and C. Sun, “Application of laser ablation in adhesive bonding of metallic materials: A review,” Optics & Laser Technology, vol. 128, p. 106188, 2020. [CrossRef]
- M. Irfan, G. Requena, and J. Haubrich, “The effect of weak boundary layers on adhesion properties of laser pretreated aluminum alloy EN-AW 6082 surfaces,” International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives, 2022.
- M. Ostapiuk and J. Bieniaś, “Fracture Analysis and Shear Strength of Aluminum/CFRP and GFRP adhesive joint in fiber metal laminates,” Materials (Basel, Switzerland), vol. 13, no. 1, 2019. [CrossRef]
- J. Freund et al., “Relationship between laser-generated micro- and nanostructures and the long-term stability of bonded epoxy-aluminum joints,” The Journal of Adhesion, pp. 1–31, 2023. [CrossRef]
- DIN EN 515:2017-05, Aluminum and aluminum alloys - Wrought products - Temper designations; German version EN_515:2017, Berlin.
- SGL epo GmbH, “SIGRAPREG® C U230-0/NF-E320/39%: safety data sheet,” (in german) 1.02, Jun. 2019.
- S. Wu et al., “Adhesion properties of the hybrid system made of laser-structured aluminium EN AW 6082 and CFRP by co-bonding-pressing process,” The Journal of Adhesion, pp. 1–29, 2023. [CrossRef]
- DIN EN 1465:2009-07, Adhesives - Determination of tensile lap-shear strength of bonded assemblies; German version EN_1465:2009, Berlin.
- W. S. Rasband, ImageJ. Java 1.8.0_172 (64-bit). Bethesda, Maryland (USA): U. S. National Institutes of Health, 1997-2022. [Online]. Available: https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/.
- L. F. M. da Silva, T. N. S. S. Rodrigues, M. A. V. Figueiredo, M. F. S. F. de Moura, and J. A. G. Chousal, “Effect of adhesive type and thickness on the lap shear strength,” The Journal of Adhesion, vol. 82, no. 11, pp. 1091–1115, 2006. [CrossRef]
- L. F. Da Silva, P. J. das Neves, R. D. Adams, A. Wang, and J. K. Spelt, “Analytical models of adhesively bonded joints—Part II: Comparative study,” International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 331–341, 2009. [CrossRef]
- J. M. Hundley, H. T. Hahn, J.-M. Yang, and A. B. Facciano, “Multi-scale modeling of metal-composite interfaces in titanium-graphite fiber metal laminates part I: Molecular scale,” OJCM, vol. 01, no. 01, pp. 19–37, 2011. [CrossRef]
- J. M. Hundley, H. T. Hahn, J.-M. Yang, and A. B. Facciano, “Multi-scale modeling of metal-composite interfaces in titanium-graphite fiber metal laminates part II: Continuum scale,” Journal of Composite Materials, vol. 46, no. 10, pp. 1235–1249, 2012. [CrossRef]
- S. Li, H. Wan, J. Lin, and J. Min, “Physicochemical interactions between amorphous metal oxide and polymer in metal–polymer hybrid materials,” Materials & Design, vol. 230, p. 111993, 2023. [CrossRef]









| R | Frequency [kHz] | Laser power [W] | Laser spot overlap [%] | Number of scans [x] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 60 | 20 | 10 | 5 |
| 2 | 40 | 20 | 50 | 1 |
| 3 | 60 | 15 | 50 | 1 |
| 17 | 60 | 20 | 50 | 1 |
| 18 | 60 | 10 | 10 | 1 |
| 19 | 60 | 10 | 50 | 1 |
| 34 | 80 | 10 | 10 | 5 |
| 35 | 80 | 15 | 50 | 5 |
| 36 | 80 | 10 | 10 | 1 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).