Fabrication and characterization of the thermoplastic and thermoset syntactic foam core‐based sandwich composites
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract This study focuses on the preparation and characterization of two types of syntactic foams with the raw materials of hollow glass microspheres, polypropylene, and epoxy resin. The thermoset resin‐based and thermoplastic resin‐based syntactic foam slabs were produced and then used as the core material to fabricate thin‐layer sandwich composites. The carbon/epoxy composites were used as skins. The tensile properties and the fracture surface of the syntactic foams were observed. The bonding performance between the laminations and bending strength of the sandwich composites were investigated. The results show that both the thermoplastic resin‐based and thermosetting resin‐based syntactic foam slabs can be well bonded with the skins. The densities of the sandwich composites are 1.06 and 1.04 g/cm 3 , respectively. The sandwich composites have a good performance in bending resistance and the flexural strengths are 473.0 and 627.7 MPa, respectively.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Cellular and Composite Structures · Polymer composites and self-healing · Silicone and Siloxane Chemistry
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
AECC Beijing Institute of Aeronautical Materials Beijing China
School of Aeronautical Engineering Zhengzhou University of Aeronautics Zhengzhou Henan China
School of Materials Science and Engineering Beihang University Beijing China
Funding
Beihang University
References (22)
Show source-provided references
1. Amos S. E. · 2015 · 35
2. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2006.04.09010.1016/j.compstruct.2006.04.090 ↗
3. 10.12783/issn.2168-4286/2.1/Salleh10.12783/issn.2168-4286/2.1/Salleh ↗
4. HongYF. Procession of expanded thermoplastic/thermoset syntactic foam. Georgia Institute of technology. PhD Thesis Georgia Institute of Technology USA 2015 pp. 25–37
5. 10.1177/109963620504756010.1177/1099636205047560 ↗
6. Gupta N. · 2013 · 310.1007/978-3-319-01243-8 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.03.01210.1016/j.compscitech.2005.03.012 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.09.03010.1016/j.compositesb.2013.09.030 ↗
9. 10.1007/s11837-013-0796-810.1007/s11837-013-0796-8 ↗
10. 10.1007/s10853-008-3074-310.1007/s10853-008-3074-3 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.matdes.2016.01.10810.1016/j.matdes.2016.01.108 ↗
12. 10.1177/002199830505203710.1177/0021998305052037 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.04.00210.1016/j.compositesb.2015.04.002 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.cej.2015.11.09410.1016/j.cej.2015.11.094 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.10.04410.1016/j.compositesb.2015.10.044 ↗
16. Kumar SA · J. Cell. Plast. · 2015 · 52 · 1
17. 10.1177/0021955X1036832110.1177/0021955X10368321 ↗
18. Ahmed S. M. · Int. J. Eng. Sci. · 2016 · 40 · 201
19. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.12.04010.1016/j.compositesb.2013.12.040 ↗
20. 10.1023/A:101120051748910.1023/A:1011200517489 ↗
21. ASTM D 4541–17 Standard test method for pull‐off strength of coatings using portable adhesion testers.
22. 10.1177/073168441245291910.1177/0731684412452919 ↗