Acta Materialia 55 (2007) 2291–2299

www.actamat-journals.com

Density dependence of the compressive properties of porous copper

over a wide density range
Masataka Hakamada *, Yuuki Asao, Tetsumune Kuromura, Youqing Chen,
Hiromu Kusuda, Mamoru Mabuchi
Department of Energy Science and Technology, Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University, Yoshidahonmachi, Sakyo, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan

Received 2 August 2006; received in revised form 14 November 2006; accepted 16 November 2006
Available online 19 January 2007

Abstract

The compressive properties of porous copper with relative densities, q/qs, of 0.22–0.96 were investigated. In the low relative density
range (q/qs < 0.5–0.6), porous copper showed a density exponent n of 2.3, where n represents the relative density dependence of yield
strength. In this range, the bending and buckling of cell walls and the formation of macroscopic deformation bands were observed. How-
ever, porous copper with a higher relative density (0.5–0.6 < q/qs < 0.9–1) had an n value of 1, where the dominant deformation mode
of cell walls was yielding, and no clear deformation band was observed. Also, in the highest relative density range (q/qs very close to 1),
the compressive properties degraded markedly with decreasing density, indicating that stress concentration around the minimal pores
occurred in this density range.
 2006 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Compression test; Foams; Porous material; Mechanical properties; Relative density

1. Introduction
Porous metals or metallic foams are emerging materials
which possess many attractive properties, such as very low
density, large compressive deformation at a constant flow
stress, large surface area, and thermal and chemical resis-
tance [1–3]. They are promising candidates for structural
use [1–3], heat exchangers [2], filters [4], sound absorbers
[5–7] and artificial bones [8,9], among others. In particular,
one of the most promising applications of porous metals is
in vehicles equipped with an impact-absorbing material,
because they are very light and can absorb the impact
energy through their large compressive deformation at a
constant flow stress [1–3]. For such application, the defor-
mation behavior of porous metals under compression must
be well understood.
The compressive properties of porous metals mostly
depend on the density of the materials [1]. Two variables,
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +81 75 753 5421; fax: +81 75 753 5428.
E-mail address: hakamada@g03.mbox.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp (M. Haka-
mada).
that is, the relative yield strength and relative density, are
used comprehensively to understand the relationship
between the compressive strength and density of various
porous materials [1,10]. The relative yield strength (ry/
rys) is the yield stress of a porous material (ry) divided
by the yield stress of its cell strut (or wall) solid (rys). ry
is often replaced by the plateau stress (the flow stress of a
plateau region in the compressive stress–strain curve) of a
porous material [1]. The relative density (q/qs) is the den-
sity of a porous material (q) divided by the density of its
cell strut (or wall) solid (qs). The two variables are related
by [1,10]
 n
ry q
¼C ð1Þ
rys qs
where C is a constant for the geometric effect, and n is the
density exponent, which is a constant giving the relative
density dependence of the yield strength of a porous
material.
To date, there are many studies on the deformation of
porous metals based on compression tests [1–3,11–28].

1359-6454/$30.00  2006 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2006.11.024
2292
Fig. 1 and Table 1 summarize the literature data for the
relationship between the relative density and the relative
yield strength of various metals, ranging from high to
low porosity metals [11–28]. The slope of the double loga-
rithmic plots for each material in Fig. 1 corresponds to the
value of n in Eq. (1). Table 1 contains the values of n which
are calculated from the data in the literature. It can be seen
from Fig. 1 that the scatter in relative yield strength is large
in a lower density range. A certain porous metal in the
lower density range exhibits a relative yield strength >10
times higher than that of another porous metal, when the
two have identical relative density. The large scatter in rel-
ative yield strength is probably due to disunity in pore
characteristics such as the shape and size, resulting in a
large variation in the value of C in Eq. (1). It is of interest
to note from Table 1 that the values of n are in the range
1.5–3 for porous metals with low relative density [11–23];
however, for porous metals with higher relative density,
there is large variation in the n value from 1.0 to 6.3 [24–
28]. Therefore, it appears that there is a ‘critical relative
density’ which divides the compressive properties of porous
metals, affecting the values of n. However, the literature
data in Fig. 1, which are scattered by the disunity of the
pore characteristics, may give uncertain information for
the relative density dependence of the compressive
strength. To know precisely how the compressive proper-
100
10-1
Relative yield strength, σ y /σ ys
10-2
10-3
10-4
10-5
10-1
Relative density, ρ /ρs
Fig. 1. Relationship between relative density and relative yield strength of
various porous metals in the literature [11–21,23–27].
M. Hakamada et al. / Acta Materialia 55 (2007) 2291–2299
ties of porous metals depend on their relative density, the
pore geometry and size distribution must be similar over
a wide density range.
The value of n in Eq. (1) may be governed by the defor-
mation mode of individual cell struts or walls, such as
yielding, bending and buckling [1,10,29]. In particular,
the bending and buckling modes are peculiar to porous
materials consisting of cell struts or walls. Hence, it is
worth investigating how the individual cell struts or walls
are deformed when the relative density is varied in a wide
range. Another feature of the compression behavior of por-
ous metals is the formation of deformation bands, i.e.,
bands of deformed cells which are aligned vertically to
the loading direction [11,30–32]. It is known that deforma-
tion band formation, and thus the compressive properties
of porous materials, are affected by pore characteristics
such as pore shape [29,33–37] and structural defects [38–
44] (missing cell walls, elongated pores and significant cell
wall curvature, among others). Therefore, for a proper
understanding of the relative density dependence of struc-
tural deformation characteristics (the deformation mode
of individual cell struts or walls and the formation of a
deformation band), it is required that pore shape is united
and that the structural defects are sufficiently limited.
Fine control of pore characteristics can be attained by
spacer methods in which metal matrices containing spacer
particles are processed, after which the spacer particles are
removed [8,18,19,23,45–53]. In the present paper, porous
copper specimens with various relative densities ranging
from 0.22 to 0.96 are fabricated via the spacer method,
and the compressive properties of porous copper are exam-
ined to elucidate the dependence of the compressive defor-
mation behavior on the densities of porous metals. In
addition, deformation characteristics such as the deforma-
tion mode of individual cell walls and the formation of a
deformation band are discussed at low and high densities.
2. Experimental
Al-Si-Mg(SiC) [11]
Al-Si-Cu [12] 2.1. Specimen preparation
Zn-Cu [12]
Al [13]
Al-Mg [13] Pure copper powder with an average powder size of
Al 7075 [13]
Zn [14]
1.5 lm, purchased from Fukuda Metal Foil & Powder
Al(SiC) [15] Co. Ltd, was used as a starting material. Ammonium
Al-Si [16]
Al-Cu [17] hydrogen carbonate (NH4HCO3) particles, purchased from
Al [18]
Al [19]
Nacalai Tesque, were sieved and the particles with average
Al [20] sizes of 300–425 lm were prepared as spacer particles. The
Al-Si-Mg [21]
Al (spherical pore) [23] copper powder and spacer particles were thoroughly mixed
Al (angular pore) [23] in an agate mortar. The mixing ratios were varied according
Cu (5 μm) [24]
Cu (45 μm) [24] to the desired relative densities. The mixed powder was
Fe [25]
Cu-Sn [25] uniaxially pressed at a pressure of 100 MPa into green com-
Fe [26] pacts. The compact was then sintered in a tubular furnace
Be [27]
under an Ar + 5 vol.% H2 atmosphere. During sintering,
100 the NH4HCO3 spacer particles decomposed to gaseous spe-
cies (ammonia, water and carbon dioxide), leaving pores
behind. To avoid the burst of green compact due to the
rapid expansion of the generated gas, the temperature was
Table 1
Density and yield stress of various porous metals
Material Structure Density q (g cm3) Relative density q/qs Yield stress ry (MPa) Relative yield strength ry/rys Relative density dependence n Reference
Al–7Si–0.3Mg (SiC) Closed-cell 0.081–0.38 0.03–0.14 0.063–2.9 1.6 · 104–7.5 · 103 2.5 [11]
Al–6Si–4Cu Closed-cell 0.2–0.8 0.07–0.29 5.9–23.7 4.2 · 102–1.7 · 101 1.89 [12]

M. Hakamada et al. / Acta Materialia 55 (2007) 2291–2299

Zn–4Cu Closed-cell 1.0–2.0 0.14–0.27 5.8–21.2 2.8 · 102–1.0 · 101 2.01 [12]
Al Open-cell 0.17–0.37 0.06–0.14 0.4–2.1 6.0 · 103–4.2 · 102 2.4 [13]
Al–7Mg Open-cell 0.14–0.56 0.05–0.21 0.7–13.2 3.1 · 103–5.7 · 102 2.1 [13]
Al 7075 Open-cell 0.26–0.56 0.1–0.21 1.5–13.5 4.3 · 103–3.9 · 102 2.6 [13]
Zn Open-cell 0.34–0.55 0.05–0.08 0.2–1.6 1.0 · 103–8.0 · 103 2.8 [14]
Al (SiC) Closed-cell 0.27–0.54 0.1–0.2 0.64–2.57 2.4 · 103–6.6 · 103 1.5 [15]
Al–Si Closed-cell 0.81–1.03 0.3–0.38 16.3–29 6.5 · 102–1.2 · 101 2.5 [16]
Al–4Cu Closed-cell 0.25–0.84 0.09–0.31 1.7–18.5 6.8 · 103–7.4 · 102 2.2 [17]
Al Closed-cell 0.27–0.625 0.1–0.25 1.7–11.4 3.4 · 102–2.3 · 101 1.9 [18]
Al Open-cell 2.14–4.35 0.19–0.27 0.79–1.6 1.6 · 102–3.2 · 102 1.63 [19]
Al Closed-cell 0.49–0.82 0.19–0.31 2.2–6.9 1.3 · 102–4.1 · 102 2.5 [20]
Al–7Si–0.45Mg Closed-cell 0.21–2.67 0.08–1.0 1.57–226 6.9 · 102–1.0 1.3 [21]
Ni–Cr Open-cell 0.98–7.68 0.022–0.032 0.11–0.91 1.2 · 102–3.6 · 103 2.5 [22]
Al (spherical pore) Open-cell 0.2–0.7 0.075–0.26 0.11–1.6 2.1 · 103–3.2 ·102 2.3 [23]
Al (angular pore) Open-cell 0.28–0.66 0.1–0.24 0.17–1.17 3.3 · 103–2.3 ·102 2.3 [23]
Cu (5 lm) Closed-cell 3.9–8.4 0.43–0.94 30–129 2.0 · 101–7.2 ·101 1.8 [24]
Cu (45 lm) Closed-cell 3.8–5.9 0.43–0.65 28–45 1.9 · 101–3.0 · 101 1.0 [24]
Fe Closed-cell 5.2–6.9 0.67–0.89 43–168 2.2 · 101–8.4 · 101 4.9 [25]
Cu–Sn Closed-cell 5.4–7.3 0.61–0.83 53–129 2.7 · 101–6.5 · 101 2.9 [25]
Fe Closed-cell 5.4–7.9 0.69–1.0 180–450 4.0 · 101–1.0 2.4 [26]
Be Closed-cell 1.36–1.76 0.74–0.95 87–514 1.5 · 101–8.6 · 101 6.3 [27]
Steel (without annealing)a Closed-cell 4.2–5.0 0.53–0.64 1.8 [28]
Steel (with annealing)a Closed-cell 3.3–4.7 0.46–0.60 2.5 [28]
a
The data for yield stress and relative yield strength are not included here because the scaling of stress–strain curves is unusual in this reference.

2293
2294 M. Hakamada et al. / Acta Materialia 55 (2007) 2291–2299

raised very slowly to 473 K, taking several hours. After the
slow heating, the temperature was kept at 1173 K for 2 h,
followed by furnace cooling. As a result, cylindrical copper
samples with relative densities of 0.22–0.96 were fabricated.
The maximum density was achieved when no spacer parti-
cles were used, while the minimum density was achieved
when the mixing volume ratio of Cu powder to spacer par-
ticle was 0.15. The dimensions of the specimens were
8.5 mm diameter and 10 mm high. The microstructure
of the specimens with relative densities of 0.23 and 0.70
observed with an optical microscope is shown in Fig. 2.
The fabricated specimens had a closed-cell structure. The
attained pore size was 240 lm, a little smaller than the
sizes of spacer particles, probably owing to specimen
shrinkage during heat treatment. Nevertheless, the pore
sizes and shapes were uniform throughout the specimen,
owing to proper sieving of the spacer particles. Few struc-
tural defects such as missing cell walls, significant cell wall
curvature and coupled cells were found in the fabricated
specimens.
5 mm min1 for all tests. A 0.2% proof stress was adopted
as the yield stress of the porous copper. For the measure-
ment of Young’s modulus, the specimens were unloaded
just after yielding and then loaded again to avoid the effect
of specimen face misalignment. The modulus was then cal-
culated according to the nominal compressive stress–strain
curves obtained after the second loading [16,54].
2.3. Microstructural observation
For microstructural observation, the specimens with the
relative densities of 0.22 and 0.78 were fabricated via the
spacer method. The specimens had plane outer surfaces.
Both specimens were observed before deformation and at
a nominal compressive strain of 0.2 to investigate their
compressive deformation behavior.
3. Results
3.1. Stress–strain curve

2.2. Compression test
Compression tests on the copper specimens with relative
densities of 0.22, 0.27, 0.34, 0.40, 0.44, 0.46, 0.50, 0.55,
0.59, 0.67, 0.76, 0.83, 0.89 and 0.96 were carried out at
room temperature using a universal testing machine (AG-
50kNG, Shimadzu Corp.). The crosshead velocity was
Fig. 3 shows the nominal stress–strain curves of copper
specimens with various relative densities under compres-
sion. The unloading and the second loading curves for
Young’s modulus measurement are omitted in Fig. 3 for
clarity. The compression tests revealed that an increase in
80
0.46 0.44

0.50 0.40 0.34

Nominal stress, σ / MPa

60
0.27

40

0.22
20

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Nominal strain, ε

0.96 0.89 0.83 0.76

300

0.67
Nominal stress, σ / MPa

200
0.59

0.55
100

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Nominal strain, ε

Fig. 3. Compressive stress–strain curves for copper specimens with

Fig. 2. Optical microscopic images of porous copper fabricated via spacer various relative densities of (a) 0.22–0.50 and (b) 0.55–0.96. The values
method: (a) relative density of 0.23; (b) relative density of 0.70. attached to curves indicate relative densities.
 M. Hakamada et al. / Acta Materialia 55 (2007) 2291–2299 2295

the relative density of specimens causes an increase in flow
stress. The curves of specimens with lower relative densities
showed three distinct deformation regions, that is, the elas-
tic region at the initial stage of the deformation, the plateau
region where the specimens deform under a nearly constant
flow stress (plateau stress), and the densification region
where the flow stress increases steeply at higher strain.
The densification strain, at which the steep increase in flow
stress initiates, was larger for the specimens with lower den-
sity [28]. These characteristics are the same as reported so
far [1]. However, the curves of specimens with higher rela-
tive densities did not show these clear distinctions; in other
words, the plateau and the densification regions seem to
have emerged simultaneously after the elastic region.
3.2. Compressive yield stress
Fig. 4 shows the relationship between the compressive
yield stress and the relative density for porous copper fab-
ricated via the spacer method. In Fig. 4, the plateau stress
was not substituted for the yield stress ry in Eq. (1),
because the curves of specimens with higher relative densi-
ties did not have clear plateau regions, and the plateau
stress was ambiguous. The axes being scaled logarithmi-
cally, the slope of the plots in Fig. 4 is the density exponent
n in Eq. (1). The value of n at relative densities <0.5–0.6
was 2.3. Similar n values of 2–3 have been reported in
many works [11,12,16–18,20,22,23]. However, n was 1.3
at higher relative densities. Also, the specimens with the
relative densities of 0.89, 0.96 and 1.0 showed an acute
drop in compressive yield stress with decreasing density.
The specimens with relative densities of 0.89 and 0.96 are
likely to be regarded as bulk materials containing a small
number of pores. Thus, it is suggested that the minimal
pores act as defects or sources of stress concentration in
the specimens with relative densities close to 1. As a result,
it is noted that the deformation can be divided into three
regions: Region I in the lower relative density range,
Region II in the higher relative density range and Region
III in the highest relative density range close to 1, as shown
in Fig. 4.
3.3. Young’s modulus
Fig. 5 shows the relationship between Young’s modulus
and the relative density for porous copper. The relationship
between the Young’s modulus (E) and the relative density
(q/qs) of porous materials is given by [1]
 n0
q
E ¼ C0 ð2Þ
qs
where C 0 and n 0 are constants. The slope of the plots, which
corresponds to n 0 in Eq. (2), was 2.0 at relative densities
<0.5, while the slope was 1.2 at relative densities > 0.5.
The Young’s modulus of the specimen with a relative den-
sity of 1 was much larger than the others. It should be
noted that the deformation can be divided into three re-
gions from the viewpoint of not only the yield stress, but
also Young’s modulus.
4. Discussion
4.1. Deformation mode of cell wall
The results of the compression tests showed that the
deformation can be divided into three regions, depending
on the relative density. The specimens in Region III, which
is a relative density range close to 1, can be regarded as

Region III Region III

Region I Region II 100 Region I Region II

50
Compressive yield stress, σy / MPa

100
Young's modulus, E / GPa

1
50 1.2

1.3
10 1
1
2.0
10
5
2.3
5
1

1 1
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Relative density, ρ/ρs Relative density, ρ /ρs

Fig. 4. Relationship between relative density and yield strength of copper Fig. 5. Relationship between relative density and Young’s modulus of
specimens fabricated via spacer method. copper specimens fabricated via spacer method.
2296 M. Hakamada et al. / Acta Materialia 55 (2007) 2291–2299

bulk materials including a small amount of pores, as

explained in the previous section. In this section, the differ-
ences in the deformation mode of individual cell walls
between Regions I and II are discussed.
Figs. 6 and 7 show the observed cell wall deformation in
the specimen with a relative density of 0.22 (in Region I),
and Fig. 8 shows the observed cell wall deformation in
the specimen with the relative density of 0.70 (in Region
II). In Figs. 6–8, the cell walls of the specimens before
deformation are shown in (a), and the same portions com-
pressed at a nominal strain of 0.20 are shown in (b). The
loading direction is vertical in Figs. 6–8. In the specimen
in Region I, bending of cell walls causing plastic hinges
at the nodes (Fig. 6) and buckling of cell walls (Fig. 7) were
observed. Bastawros et al. [30] showed three processes in
the deformation of a porous metal: localized straining at
cell nodes, discrete bands of concentrated strain and,
finally, complete plastic collapse, and they demonstrated
with X-ray computed tomography analysis that buckling
and bending occur in each cell, resulting in localized defor-
mation. The deformation in Region I in Figs. 6 and 7 is in
agreement with their results. However, as shown in Fig. 8,
few bent or buckled cell walls were found, and most of the
cell walls yielded and became thick in the specimen in
Region II.
The exponent n can be theoretically obtained by analyz-
Fig. 7. Cell wall buckling in porous copper with relative density 0.22.
ing the deformation modes of a cubic closed-cell model
[1,10]. When the cell walls initially deform by bending,
buckling or yielding, the theoretical value of n is 2, 3 or

Fig. 6. Cell wall bending in porous copper with relative density 0.22. Fig. 8. Cell wall yielding in porous copper with relative density 0.70.
 M. Hakamada et al. / Acta Materialia 55 (2007) 2291–2299 2297

1, respectively (see Appendix). As shown in Fig. 4, the

experimental value of n in Region I was 2.3, which is
between 2 for the bending mode of cell walls and 3 for
the buckling mode. Thus, it is likely that cell walls of com-
pressed specimens in Region I predominantly deform by
bending and buckling. The expectation of cell wall defor-
mation mode from the n value of 2.3 is in agreement with
the observation shown in Figs. 6 and 7.
However, the experimental value of n in Region II was
1.3, as shown in Fig. 4. This value is a little larger than
1, which is the theoretical value for the yielding mode of
cell walls. The approximation given by
q t
/ ð3Þ
qs l
must hold for the validity of Eq. (1), where t is the cell wall
thickness, and l is the cell size [1]; however, because the
relationship between q/qs and t/l can be more properly rep-
resented as
q t  t 2  t 3
¼3 3 þ ð4Þ
qs l l l
the approximation in Eq. (3) does not hold when t/l (and
hence q/qs) is large. In Region II, q/qs is too large to fulfill
the approximation represented by Eq. (3), indicating that Fig. 9. Surface of compressed porous copper (e = 0.20) with relative
the theoretical figure in Region II deviates from 1 to some density 0.22. Deformation bands are indicated by surrounding dashed
lines.
extent. Consequently, it is suggested that cell walls of com-
pressed specimens in Region II deform predominantly by
yielding.
Therefore, it is conclusively demonstrated from the
results in Fig. 4 and the observations in Figs. 6–8 that
low-relative-density (high-porosity) porous metals in
Region I deform by the bending and buckling of their cell
walls and that high-relative-density (low-porosity) porous
metals in Region II deform by the yielding of their cell
walls.

4.2. Deformation band

The emergence of the plateau region in the compressive

stress–strain curve for a porous material is closely related
to the formation of deformation bands [11,30–32]. Hence,
the simultaneous occurrence of the plateau and densifica-
tion regions in the stress–strain curves for the high-rela-
tive-density specimens, as shown in Fig. 3, is probably
because the specimens with higher relative densities tend
to deform uniformly, and clear deformation bands do not
form inside the specimens. Therefore, the compressive
behaviors of the specimens in Regions I and II may differ
not only in the deformation mode of individual cell walls,
Fig. 10. Surface of compressed porous copper (e = 0.20) with relative
but also in the macroscopic deformation behavior, namely, density 0.70.
the presence or absence of deformation band formation.
Fig. 9 shows the surface of the deformed porous copper
specimen with the relative density of 0.22 (in Region I), and presence of deformation bands in the porous copper spec-
Fig. 10 shows that with the relative density of 0.70 (in imen with the relative density of 0.22, as indicated by white
Region II), where both specimens were compressed at a dashed lines in Fig. 9. This is in agreement with the results
nominal strain of 0.20. Minute observation revealed the in the previous works [11,30–32]. In the specimen with a
2298 M. Hakamada et al. / Acta Materialia 55 (2007) 2291–2299
relative density of 0.70, however, clear deformation bands
were not found, and local deformation was observed par-
tially around the pores. Zhang and Wang [24] investigated
the deformation of porous copper with medium to high
densities, and they showed that spherical pores changed
to take on an ellipsoidal shape, but that no local deforma-
tion band was found. It is therefore likely that the deforma-
tion is relatively homogeneous in the specimen with a high
relative density, resulting in no clear deformation bands.
The specimens in Region I and those in Region II dif-
fered from the viewpoints of both the microscopic (defor-
mation mode of cell walls) and macroscopic (presence or
absence of local deformation bands) deformation behav-
iors. Therefore, the microscopic and macroscopic deforma-
tion behaviors may have strong relationships. It is thus
suggested that the bending and buckling of cell walls cause
intense local deformation, compared with the yielding of
cell walls, resulting in the enhancement of the formation
of deformation bands.
5. Conclusions
Porous copper specimens with various relative densities
of 0.22–0.96 were fabricated via the spacer method, and
their compressive properties were examined. The conclu-
sions are as follows.
(1) An increase in the relative density of the porous cop-
per caused an increase in flow stress and a decrease in
densification strain under compression.
(2) The yield strength and Young’s modulus of the por-
ous copper depended on its relative density in three
ways. In the lower relative density range (Region I,
q/qs < 0.5–0.6), the relative density dependence n of
yield stress was 2.3, while the value was 1 in the
higher relative density range (Region II, 0.5–
0.6 < q/qs < 0.9). In the highest relative density range
(Region III, q/qs is very close to 1), the relative den-
sity strongly affected the yield strength and Young’s
modulus, probably owing to stress concentration
around the minimal pores.
(3) Microstructural observation revealed that in the
lower relative density range (Region I), the cell walls
dominantly deform by bending and buckling, but the
dominant cell wall deformation mode in the higher
relative density range (Region II) is yielding. These
findings were in agreement with the results of the den-
sity exponent obtained by compressive tests.
(4) Deformation bands were observed in the compressed
specimen in the lower relative density range (Region
I), but not in the compressed specimen in the higher
relative density range (Region II). Thus, the speci-
mens in Region I and those in Region II differed from
the viewpoints of both the microscopic (deformation
mode of cell walls) and macroscopic (presence or
absence of local deformation bands) deformation
behavior.
Acknowledgement
The authors thank Dr. Y. Yamada (National Institute
of Advanced and Industrial Science and Technology, Ja-
pan) for advice on the spacer method.
Appendix
According to the analysis by Gibson and Ashby [1], the
cell deformation in a closed-cell porous material consists of
the stretching of cell faces (membranes) and the bending of
cell edges, rather than merely the bending of cell walls with
uniform thickness. The former mechanism of cell deforma-
tion holds for a porous metal produced by a liquid-state
process, because the cell face is much thinner than the cell
edge, owing to drainage during the liquid-state process [55].
However, in the present work, because porous copper was
fabricated by a solid-state process, the thickness of the cell
wall was more uniform than that fabricated by a liquid-
state process. Hence, it is reasonable that the cell deforma-
tion for the porous copper in the present work does not
contain the stretching of cell faces, but consists of bending,
buckling and/or yielding of a cell wall.
The theoretical values of n in Eq. (1) for cell wall bend-
ing and cell wall buckling are given in the study by Gibson
[10], where deformation mechanisms for bending and
buckling are denoted as ‘plastic yielding’ (at the nodes)
and ‘elastic buckling’, respectively, in Table 1 in the litera-
ture [10]. According to the analysis, the value of n for cell
wall bending is 2 and that for cell wall buckling is 3. The
value of n for cell wall yielding is derived from the follow-
ing discussion.
Here, the cubic closed-cell model with cell wall thickness
t and cell size l, which is found in Fig. 6 in Ref. [10], is
assumed. If the cell wall is deformed by yielding where
the cell wall thickens with strain, the critical applied load
for plastic deformation (Fyield) is proportional to ltrys,
because the cross-sectional area of the cell wall is lt.
Therefore, considering the proportional relationship
between t/l and q/qs (Eq. (3)), the critical stress for cell wall
yielding (ryield) is given by
F yield t q
ryield / / rys / rys ðA:1Þ
l2 l qs
Therefore, the value of n in Eq. (A.1) is 1 for cell wall
yielding.
References
[1] Gibson LJ, Ashby MF. Cellular solids: structure and proper-
ties. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1997.
[2] Evans AG, Hutchinson JW, Ashby MF. Prog Mater Sci 1999;43:171.
[3] Banhart J. Prog Mater Sci 2001;46:559.
[4] Despois JF, Mortensen A. Acta Mater 2005;53:1381.
[5] Lu TJ, Hess A, Ashby MF. J Appl Phys 1999;85:7528.
[6] Lu TJ, Chen F, He D. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;108:1697.
[7] Hakamada M, Kuromura T, Chen Y, Kusuda H, Mabuchi M. Appl
Phys Lett 2006;88:254106.
 M. Hakamada et al. / Acta Materialia 55 (2007) 2291–2299
[8] Wen CE, Yamada Y, Shimojima K, Chino Y, Hosokawa H, Mabuchi
M. J Mater Res 2002;17:2633.
[9] Takemoto M, Fujibayashi S, Neo M, Suzuki J, Kokubo T,
Nakamura T. Biomaterials 2005;26:6014.
[10] Gibson LJ. J Biomech 1985;18:317.
[11] Simone AE, Gibson LJ. Acta Mater 1998;46:3109.
[12] Banhart J, Baumeister J. J Mater Sci 1998;33:1431.
[13] Thornton PH, Magee CL. Metall Trans A 1975;6:1253.
[14] Thornton PH, Magee CL. Metall Trans A 1975;6:1801.
[15] Prakash O, Sang H, Embury JD. Mater Sci Eng A 1995;199:195.
[16] Sugimura Y, Meyer J, He HY, Bart-Smith H, Grenstedt J, Evans AG.
Acta Mater 1997;45:5245.
[17] Kunze HD, Baumeister J, Banhart J, Weber M. Powder Metall Int
1993;25:182.
[18] Wen CE, Yamada Y, Asahina T, Kato K, Sonoda T, Watazu A,
et al. Mater Trans 2004;45:327.
[19] San Marchi C, Mortensen A. Acta Mater 2001;49:3959.
[20] Kennedy AR. J Mater Sci 2004;39:3085.
[21] Yang CC, Nakae H. ISIJ Int 2000;40:1283.
[22] Choe H, Dunand DC. Mater Sci Eng A 2004;384:184.
[23] Goodall R, Marmottant A, Despois JF, Salvo L, Mortensen A.
Replicated microcellular aluminum with spherical pores. In: Nakajima
H, Kanetake N, editors. JIMIC-4 porous metals and metal foaming
technology. Sendai: The Japan Institute of Metals; 2005. p. 207–10.
[24] Zhang E, Wang B. Int J Mech Sci 2005;47:744.
[25] Wang B, Klepaczko JR, Lu G, Kong LX. J Mater Process Technol
2001;113:574.
[26] da Silva MG, Ramesh KT. Int J Plast 1997;13:587.
[27] Beasley D, Turner GI, Edwards KL. J Mater Sci 1975;10:436.
[28] Park C, Nutt SR. Mater Sci Eng A 2000;288:111.
[29] Yamada Y, Wen CE, Shimojima K, Hosokawa H, Chino Y, Mabuchi
M. Mater Trans 2002;43:1298.
[30] Bastawros AF, Bart-Smith H, Evans AG. J Mech Phys Solids
2000;48:301.
2299
[31] Bart-Smith H, Bastawros AF, Mumm DR, Evans AG, Sypeck DJ,
Wadley HNG. Acta Mater 1998;46:3583.
[32] Markaki AE, Clyne TW. Acta Mater 2001;49:1677.
[33] Miyoshi T, Itoh M, Mukai T, Kanahashi H, Kohzu H, Tanabe S,
et al. Scr Mater 1999;41:1055.
[34] Nieh TG, Higashi K, Wadsworth J. Mater Sci Eng A 2000;283:105.
[35] Nieh TG, Kinney JH, Wadsworth J, Ladd AJC. Scripta Mater
1998;38:1487.
[36] Yamada Y, Shimojima K, Mabuchi M, Nakamura M, Asahina T,
Mukai T, et al. Philos Mag Lett 2000;80:215.
[37] Tantikom K, Aizawa T, Mukai T. Int J Solids Struct 2005;42:2199.
[38] Jeon I, Asahina T. Acta Mater 2005;53:3415.
[39] Zhu HX, Windle AH. Acta Mater 2002;50:1041.
[40] Gradinger R, Rammerstorfer FG. Acta Mater 1999;47:143.
[41] Chen C, Lu TJ, Fleck NA. J Mech Phys Solids 1999;47:2235.
[42] Simone AE, Gibson LJ. Acta Mater 1998;46:3929.
[43] Silva MJ, Gibson LJ. Int J Mech Sci 1997;39:549.
[44] Han F, Cheng H, Wang J, Wang Q. Scripta Mater 2004;50:13.
[45] Polonsky L, Lipson S, Markus H. Modern Cast 1961;39:57.
[46] Zhao YY, Sun DX. Scripta Mater 2001;44:105.
[47] Wen CE, Mabuchi M, Yamada Y, Shimojima K, Chino Y, Asahina
T. Scripta Mater 2001;45:1147.
[48] Chou KS, Song MA. Scripta Mater 2002;46:379.
[49] Wen CE, Mabuchi M, Yamada Y, Shimojima K, Chino Y,
Hosokawa H, et al. J Mater Sci Lett 2003;22:1407.
[50] Zhao YY, Fung T, Zhang LP, Zhang FL. Scripta Mater 2005;52:
295.
[51] Brothers AH, Scheunemann R, DeFouw JD, Dunand DC. Scripta
Mater 2005;52:335.
[52] Hakamada M, Yamada Y, Nomura T, Chen Y, Kusuda H, Mabuchi
M. Mater Trans 2005;46:2624.
[53] Bakan HI. Scripta Mater 2006;55:203.
[54] McCullough KYG, Fleck NA, Ashby MF. Acta Mater 1999;47:2323.
[55] Simone AE, Gibson LJ. Acta Mater 1998;46:2139.