Experimental investigation of compressive behavior and vibration properties of layered hybrid foam formed by aluminum foam/EPS-filled syntactic foam
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Hybrid foams are a type of composite material created by combining two foam materials. They are preferred in many applications due to their lightweight, high strength, and ability to absorb more energy. In this research, a new hybrid foam was designed for use in sandwich cores of structural materials. The hybrid foam was formed by combining closed-cell aluminum foam and expanded polystyrene (EPS)-filled syntactic foam. The EPS-filled syntactic foams were produced with the conventional mold casting technique. Uniaxial compressive behaviors (0.5 mm/min) of layered hybrid foams consisting of EPS-filled syntactic foam with three different densities and closed-cell aluminum foam were investigated experimentally and compared with conventional single-foamed materials. These results exhibited that in general, layered hybrid foams outperform conventional single-foamed materials in terms of compressive strength. Moreover, the natural frequency and damping ratio of the layered hybrid foams were investigated by vibration tests under clamped-free and free-free boundary conditions and compared to conventional single-foamed materials. It was established that the vibration damping capacity of the layered hybrid foams improved compared to the closed-cell aluminum foam. Additionally, the microstructure of the conventional single-foamed materials was examined by SEM. In the outcome of the research, the experimental results showed that layered hybrid foam provides an opportunity to design lightweight cellular materials with effective mechanical properties.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Cellular and Composite Structures · Polymer composites and self-healing · Polymer Foaming and Composites
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (63)
Show source-provided references
1. Yao S, Chen Z, Xu P, Li Z, Zhao Z (2021) Experimental and numerical study on the energy absorption of polyurethane foam-filled metal/composite hybrid structures. Metals 11(1):118–137. https://doi.org/10.3390/met1101011810.3390/met11010118 ↗
2. Gupta N, Paramsothy M (2014) Metal-and polymer-matrix composites: functional lightweight materials for high-performance structures. Jom 66(6):862–865. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-014-0969-010.1007/s11837-014-0969-0 ↗
3. Birman V, Kardomateas GA (2018) Review of current trends in research and applications of sandwich structures. Compos Part B: Eng 42:221–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.01.02710.1016/j.compositesb.2018.01.027 ↗
4. Arunkumar M, Pitchaimani J, Gangadharan K (2018) Bending and free vibration analysis of foam-filled truss core sandwich panel. J Sandw Struct Mater 20(5):617–638. https://doi.org/10.1177/109963621667061210.1177/1099636216670612 ↗
5. McShane GJ, Radford DD, Deshpande VS, Fleck NA (2006) The response of clamped sandwich plates with lattice cores subjected to shock loading. Eur J Mech A Solids 25(2):215–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euromechsol.2005.08.00110.1016/j.euromechsol.2005.08.001 ↗
6. Wangjing Y, Zhang jia Z, Xue min X, Zhang L (2019) Free vibration analysis of composite sandwich panels with hierarchical honeycomb sandwich core. Thin-Walled Struct 145:106425–106435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2019.10642510.1016/j.tws.2019.106425 ↗
7. Zhou T, Zhang P, Xiao W, Liu J, Cheng Y (2019) Experimental investigation on the performance of PVC foam core sandwich panels under air blast loading. Compos Struct 226:111081–111095. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.11108110.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111081 ↗
8. Dharmasena KP, Wadley HNG, Williams K, Xue Z, Hutchinson JW (2011) Response of metallic pyramidal lattice core sandwich panels to high intensity impulsive loading in air. Int J Impact Eng 38(5):275–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2010.10.00210.1016/j.ijimpeng.2010.10.002 ↗
9. Hohe J, Beckmann C, Böhme W, Weise J, Reinfried M, Luthardt F, Rapp F, Diemert J (2019) An experimental and numerical survey into the potential of hybrid foams. Mech Mater 136:103063–103078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2019.10306310.1016/j.mechmat.2019.103063 ↗
10. Karuppasamy R, Barik D (2020) Production methods of aluminium foam: a brief review. Mater Today: Proc 37(2):1584–1587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.07.16110.1016/j.matpr.2020.07.161 ↗
11. Banhart J (2013) Light-metal foams—history of innovation and technological challenges. Adv Eng Mater 15(3):82–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/adem.20120021710.1002/adem.201200217 ↗
12. Smith BH, Szyniszewski S, Hajjar JF, Schafer BW, Arwade SR (2012) Steel foam for structures: A review of applications, manufacturing and material properties. J Constr Steel Res 71:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2011.10.02810.1016/j.jcsr.2011.10.028 ↗
13. Banhart J (2001) Manufacture, characterisation and application of cellular metals and metal foams. Prog Mater Sci 46(6):559–632. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6425(00)00002-510.1016/S0079-6425(00)00002-5 ↗
14. García-Moreno F (2016) Commercial applications of metal foams: their properties and production. Materials 9(2):85–112. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma902008510.3390/ma9020085 ↗
15. Lefebvre LP, Banhart J, Dunand DC (2008) Porous metals and metallic foams: current status and recent developments. Adv Eng Mater 10(9):775–787. https://doi.org/10.1002/adem.20080024110.1002/adem.200800241 ↗
16. Vengatachalam B, Huang R, Poh LH, Liu Z, Qin Q, Swaddiwudhipong S (2020) Initial yield behaviour of closed-cell aluminium foams in biaxial loading. Int J Mech Sci 191:106063–106082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.10606310.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.106063 ↗
17. Heidari Ghaleh M, Ehsani N, Baharvandi HR (2021) Compressive properties of A356 closed-cell aluminum foamed with a CaCo3 foaming agent without stabilizer particles. Met Mater Int 27(10):3856–3861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12540-020-00807-510.1007/s12540-020-00807-5 ↗
18. Verma KS, Muchhala D, Panthi S, Mondal DP (2020) Experimental and numerical study of compressive deformation behavior of closed-cell aluminum foam. Strength Mater 52(3):451–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11223-020-00197-410.1007/s11223-020-00197-4 ↗
19. Orbulov IN (2012) Compressive properties of aluminium matrix syntactic foams. Mater Sci Eng A 555:52–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2012.06.03210.1016/j.msea.2012.06.032 ↗
20. Rohatgi PK, Kim JK, Gupta N, Alaraj S, Daoud A (2006) Compressive characteristics of A356/fly ash cenosphere composites synthesized by pressure infiltration technique. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 37:430–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2005.05.04710.1016/j.compositesa.2005.05.047 ↗
21. Anbuchezhiyan G, Muthuramalingam T, Mohan B (2018) Effect of process parameters on mechanical properties of hollow glass microsphere reinforced magnesium alloy syntactic foams under vacuum die casting. Arch Civ Mech Eng 18:1645–1650. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ACME.2018.07.00810.1016/J.ACME.2018.07.008 ↗
22. Rohatgi PK, Daoud A, Schultz BF, Puri T (2009) Microstructure and mechanical behavior of die casting AZ91D-Fly ash cenosphere composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 40:883–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2009.04.01410.1016/j.compositesa.2009.04.014 ↗
23. Peroni L, Scapin M, Avalle M, Weise J, Lehmhus D (2012) Dynamic mechanical behavior of syntactic iron foams with glass microspheres. Mater Sci Eng A 552:364–375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2012.05.05310.1016/j.msea.2012.05.053 ↗
24. Peroni L, Scapin M, Avalle M, Weise J, Lehmhus D, Baumeister J (2012) Syntactic iron foams - on deformation mechanisms and strain-rate dependence of compressive properties. Adv Eng Mater 14:909–918. https://doi.org/10.1002/adem.20120016010.1002/adem.201200160 ↗
25. Jha N, Mondal DP, Goel MD, Majumdar JD, Das S, Modi OP (2014) Titanium cenospheres syntactic foam with coarser cenosphere fabricated by powder metallurgy at lower compaction load. Trans Nonferrous Met Soc China 24:89–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-6326(14)63032-610.1016/S1003-6326(14)63032-6 ↗
26. Movahedi N, Murch EG, Belova VI, Fiedler T (2019) Effect of heat treatment on the compressive behavior of zinc alloy ZA27 syntactic foam. Materials(Basel). 12(5):72–87. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma1205079210.3390/ma12050792 ↗
27. Luong DD, Shunmugasamy VC, Gupta N, Weise J, Baumeister J (2015) Quasi-static and high strain rates compressive response of iron and invar matrix syntactic foams. Mater Des 66:516–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2014.07.03010.1016/j.matdes.2014.07.030 ↗
28. Orbulov IN, Szlancsik A, Kemény A, Kincses D (2020) Compressive mechanical properties of low-cost, aluminium matrix syntactic foams. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 135:105923–10593410.1016/j.compositesa.2020.105923 ↗
29. Movahedi N, Murch GE, Belova IV, Fiedler T (2020) Manufacturing and compressive properties of tube-filled metal syntactic foams. J Alloy Compd 822:153465–15347310.1016/j.jallcom.2019.153465 ↗
30. Weise J, Lehmhus D, Baumeister J, Kun R, Bayoumi M, Busse M (2014) Production and properties of 316 L stainless steel cellular materials and syntactic foams. Steel Res Int 85(3):486–49710.1002/srin.201300131 ↗
31. Kemény A, Leveles B, Károly D (2021) Functional aluminium matrix syntactic foams filled with lightweight expanded clay aggregate particles. Mater Today Proc 45:4229–423210.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.164 ↗
32. Szlancsik A, Katona B, Dombóvári Z, Orbulov IN (2017) On the effective Young’s modulus of metal matrix syntactic foams. Mater Sci Technol 33(18):2283–228910.1080/02670836.2017.1374497 ↗
33. Károly D, Iklódi Z, Kemény A, Kincses DB, Orbulov IN (2022) Production and functional properties of graded Al-based syntactic metal foams. Metals 12(2):263–27510.3390/met12020263 ↗
34. Kirugulige MS, Kitey R, Tippur HV (2005) Dynamic fracture behavior of model sandwich structures with functionally graded core: a feasibility study. Compos Sci Technol 65(7–8):1052–1068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2004.10.02910.1016/j.compscitech.2004.10.029 ↗
35. Jhaver R, Tippur H (2009) Processing, compression response and finite element modeling of syntactic foam based interpenetrating phase composite (IPC). Mater Sci Eng, A 499(1–2):507–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2008.09.04210.1016/j.msea.2008.09.042 ↗
36. Sharma SD, Sowntharya L, Kar KK (2016) Polymer-based composite structures. Processing and applications10.1007/978-3-662-49514-8_1 ↗
37. Porfiri M, Gupta N (2009) Effect of volume fraction and wall thickness on the elastic properties of hollow particle filled composites. Compos B Eng 2:166–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2008.09.00210.1016/j.compositesb.2008.09.002 ↗
38. Yu Q, Zhao Y, Dong A, Li Y (2018) Mechanical properties of EPS filled syntactic foams prepared by VARTM. Compos B Eng 136:126–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.07.05310.1016/j.compositesb.2017.07.053 ↗
39. Gupta N, Kishore WE, Sankaran S (2001) Studies on compressive failure features in syntactic foam material. J Mater Sci 36(18):4485–4491. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:101798682060310.1023/A:1017986820603 ↗
40. Gupta N, Woldesenbet E, Kishore (2002) Compressive fracture features of syntactic foams-microscopic examination. J Mater Sci 27:3199–3209. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:101616652984110.1023/A:1016166529841 ↗
41. Gupta N, Woldesenbet E, Mensah P (2004) Compression properties of syntactic foams: effect of cenosphere radius ratio and specimen aspect ratio. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 35(1):103–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2003.08.00110.1016/j.compositesa.2003.08.001 ↗
42. Kim HS, Plubrai P (2004) Manufacturing and failure mechanisms of syntactic foam under compression. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 35:1009–1015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.03.01310.1016/j.compositesa.2004.03.013 ↗
43. Bharath HS, Sawardekar A, Waddar S, Jeyaraj P, Doddamani M (2020) Mechanical behavior of 3D printed syntactic foam composites. Compos Struct 254:112832–112844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.11283210.1016/j.compstruct.2020.112832 ↗
44. Waddar S, Jeyaraj P, Doddamani M (2018) Influence of axial compressive loads on buckling and free vibration responce of surface-modified fly ash cenesphere/epoxy syntactic foams. J Compos Mater 52(19):2621–2630. https://doi.org/10.1177/002199831775128410.1177/0021998317751284 ↗
45. Waddar S, Pitchaimani J, Doddamani M, Gupta N (2018) Buckling and free vibration behavior of cenosphere/epoxy syntactic foams under axial compressive loading. Mater Perform Charact 7(1):532–546. https://doi.org/10.1520/MPC2018007910.1520/MPC20180079 ↗
46. Cluff DRA, Esmaeili S (2009) Compressive properties of a new metal—polymer hybrid material. J Mater Sci 44:3867–3876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-009-3525-510.1007/s10853-009-3525-5 ↗
47. Ashby MF, Bréchet YJM (2003) Designing hybrid materials. Acta Mater 51(19):5801–5821. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(03)00441-510.1016/S1359-6454(03)00441-5 ↗
48. G.B.S series, 3M Corp. (2023)
49. Yuan J, Chen X, Zhou W, Li Y (2015) Study on quasi-static compressive properties of aluminum foam-epoxy resin composite structures. Compos B Eng 79:301–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.04.04710.1016/j.compositesb.2015.04.047 ↗
50. Advanced materials, Araldite ® GY 793 CH with hardener TETA product data sheet, Hunstman Corp. (2004)
51. Park SJ, Jin FL, Lee C (2005) Preparation and physical properties of hollow glass microspheres-reinforced epoxy matrix resins. Mater Sci Eng, A 402(1–2):335–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2005.05.01510.1016/j.msea.2005.05.015 ↗
52. Advanced materials, Araldite® AW 106 US and Hardener HV 953 U BD Product data sheet, Hunstman Corp. (2019)
53. ASTM C365/C365 (2016) M standard test method for flatwise compressive properties of sandwich cores, American society for testing and materials (astm) standard, West Conshohocken, PA
54. Gibson LJ, Ashby MF (1997) Cellular solids. Cambridge Solid state science SeriesYayınları10.1017/CBO9781139878326 ↗
55. ASTM E756-05 (2017) Standard test method for measuring vibration-damping properties of materials. American society for testing and materials (ASTM) standard, West Conshohocken, PA
56. Ariff ZM, Samsudin SS, Mutalib NAA (2010) Compressive behaviour of syntactic foam filled with epoxy hollow spheres having different wall thickness. In: 14th International conference “Polymeric materials 2010
57. Banhart J, Baumeister J (1998) Deformation characteristics of metal foams. J Mater Sci 33:1431–1440. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:100438322222810.1023/A:1004383222228 ↗
58. Koza E, Leonowicz M, Wojciechowski S, Simancik F (2003) Compressive strength of aluminium foams. Mater Lett 58(1–2):132–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-577X(03)00430-010.1016/S0167-577X(03)00430-0 ↗
59. Pandey R, Singh P, Khanna M, Murtaza Q (2021) Metal foam manufacturing, mechanical properties and its designing aspects—a review. In: Advances in manufacturing and industrial engineering: select proceedings of ICAPIE, 761–77010.1007/978-981-15-8542-5_66 ↗
60. Tagliavia G, Porfiri M, Gupta N (2009) Vinyl ester—glass hollow particle composites: dynamic mechanical properties at high inclusion volume fraction. J Compos Mater 43(5):561–58210.1177/0021998308097683 ↗
61. Şansveren MF, Yaman M (2019) The effect of carbon nanofiber on the dynamic and mechanical properties of epoxy/glass microballoon syntactic foam. Adv Compos Mater 28(6):561–57510.1080/09243046.2019.1610929 ↗
62. Yin S, Rayess N (2014) Characterization of polymer-metal foam hybrids for use in vibration dampening and isolation. Proced Mater Sci 4:311–31610.1016/j.mspro.2014.07.564 ↗
63. Benouali AH, Froyen L, Dillard T, Forest S, N’guyen F (2005) Investigation on the influence of cell shape anisotropy on the mechanical performance of closed cell aluminium foams using micro-computed tomography. J Mater Sci 40:5801–581110.1007/s10853-005-4994-9 ↗