ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijimpeng

The mechanical behaviour of aluminium foam structures in different

loading conditions$
Lorenzo Peroni, Massimiliano Avalle, Marco Peroni
Dipartimento di Meccanica, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino (TO), Italy
Received 6 September 2006; received in revised form 10 January 2007; accepted 28 February 2007
Available online 24 March 2007

Abstract

The use of foam has the potential for energy absorption enhancement. Many types of materials can be produced in the form of foams,
including metals and polymers. Of the metallic based foams, aluminium based are among the most advanced. Aluminium foams couple
good specific mechanical properties with high thermal stability. Among the various aspects still to be investigated regarding their
mechanical behaviour is the influence of a hydrostatic state of stress on yield strength. Unlike metals, the hydrostatic component affects
yields. Therefore, different loading conditions have to be considered to fully identify the material behaviour. Another important issue
in foam structure design is the analysis of composite structures. The mechanical behaviour of an aluminium foam has been examined.
The foam was subjected to uniaxial, hydrostatic stress, pure deviatoric stress, and combinations thereof. Results obtained will be
presented as quasi-static and dynamic uniaxial compression and quasi-static bending and shear loading. Moreover, composite structures
were made by assembling the foam into aluminium cold extruded closed section 6060 aluminium tubes. The results show that the energy
absorption capability of the composite structures is much greater than the sum of the energy absorbed by the two components, the foam
and the tube.
r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Structural foams; Passive safety materials; High strain-rate material testing; Hydrostatic testing

1. Introduction unit. One of the advantages in using metal foams, like

In the past 10 years many new processes for making
foamed metals, mostly aluminium or aluminium alloys,
have been developed. Research has led to the commercia-
lization of several products. Closed-cell aluminium foam
offers a unique combination of properties such as low
density, high stiffness, strength, and energy absorption
capability. Among the various possible applications, some
are common to other types of foams. Main field of use is
the energy absorption and dissipation for passive safety
systems. Aluminium foams have superior performance in
terms of energy absorption with respect to polymeric
foams, even considering the greater weight per volume
$
With contributions to the Symposium on Design and Analysis of
Advanced Structures, 8th Biennial ASME Conference on Engineering
Systems Design and Analysis, July 4–7, 2006, Torino, Italy.
Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 0161 226373; fax: +39 0161 226322.
E-mail address: massimiliano.avalle@polito.it (M. Avalle).
aluminium foams, is the greater range of allowable
temperatures: for polymers the limit is around 100 1C,
whereas for aluminium foams the limit is five times larger.
One of the main differences in the mechanical behaviour
of cellular materials with respect to classical homogeneous
materials is that foam failure is not independent from a
hydrostatic state of stress [1–13]. Therefore, it is not
possible to describe the failure from a single mechanical
test and failure criterion. The maximum distortion energy
or von Mises criterion rely on the evaluation of the
deviatoric component of stress, a consequence that
strength in compression is different from strength in
tension. So, it is necessary to perform tests with different
combination of deviatoric and hydrostatic stress states.
As is well known, the hydrostatic component of stress
shyd is the first stress invariant defined as [14,15]
shyd ¼ ðs1 þ s2 þ s3 Þ=3 ¼ ðsx þ sy þ sz Þ=3. (1)

0734-743X/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2007.02.007
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658 645

Equally known is the concept of the deviatoric component
of stress sdev, which is the octahedral tangential stress:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
s0dev ¼ 13 ðs1  s2 Þ2 þ ðs2  s3 Þ2 þ ðs3  s1 Þ2 . (2)
A test that gives pure deviatoric stress is, for example, a
p
shear test (shyd ¼ 0, s0dev ¼ t= 3). A test that produces
pure hydrostatic stress in the material is the hydrostatic or
triaxial test (shyd ¼ p/3, s0dev ¼ 0). A tensile test gives a
combination of deviatoric p and hydrostatic stress compo-
nents s0dev =shyd ¼ 2, differing from p the compression
components by sign: s0dev =shyd ¼  2.
However, for ease of analysis the von Mises effective
stress is used in this work as the deviatoric stress
parameter, differing from the real deviatoric stress by a
factor of (O2/3):
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
sdev ¼ p1ffiffi2 ðs1  s2 Þ2 þ ðs2  s3 Þ2 þ ðs3  s1 Þ2  sVM .
(3)
Thus, a tensile test corresponds to a ratio of the deviatoric
and hydrostatic stress components: sdev/shyd ¼ 3.
Main objective of this work was to obtain a complete
description of the mechanical behaviour, including the
failure space, for the aluminium foam FOAMINAL,
provided by Fraunhofer-Institute for Applied Materials
Research (IFAM) in Bremen (D). To obtain this result it a
series of tests were conducted to characterize the material
including building the necessary experimental equipment to
perform the required tests. The tests that were defined for
the analysis were the tensile and compression tests, the
torsion test (purely deviatoric stress field), the hydrostatic
test, in (pure hydrostatic stress), and a combination of
hydrostatic and deviatoric stress which was termed hydro-
compression. These were required to determine the failure
surface.
Finally, it was important to demonstrate the effective-
ness of the use of this foam for energy absorption. A series
of tests on a composite structure made of the foam were
inserted in a simple tubular structure. The tests on this
structure were simple compression and bending, which are
quantities of a powdered foaming agent by means of
conventional techniques. The mixture is compacted to a
semi-finished product of low porosity by applying compac-
tion techniques such as extrusion or co-extrusion. The
result of the compaction process is a foamable semi-
finished product that can be worked into sheets, profiles,
etc. by applying conventional deformation techniques.
During a final heat treatment at temperatures above the
melting point of the corresponding alloy, the material
expands and develops its highly porous, closed-cell
structure. The density r can be controlled to be in the
range from 0.2 to 0.7 g/cm3. The base material consists
of aluminium–silicon alloy (Al–Si). Fig. 1 illustrates
the geometry of a typical foam block. The coordinate
system that was used is also given in Fig. 1. Here, x denotes
the major direction, whereas the transverse y direction
is aligned with the width of the foam block; z is in
the through-the-thickness, main expansion-influenced
direction.
As it will be show in the following sections there is a
certain degree of anisotropy due to the processing method
and the gravity effect during solidification. Therefore, it is
convenient to assume a reference system for the foam
samples related to the foaming process. Direction z
(top–bottom) is the first foaming direction (for which, the
boundary planes of the block are reached first during the
foaming process, generally parallel to the vertical axis and,
therefore, affected by gravity). Direction y is transverse
(second foaming direction), while the third foaming
direction, longitudinal, is the x direction.
Each block showed wide dispersion in the foam structure
with large scatter in the cell size and shape, and the
presence of some large holes randomly distributed. Table 1
reports the main specifications of the blocks used in the test
matrix. Fig. 2 shows the available blocks of foam to obtain
test samples.
z
top-bottom (expansion)

y
the most relevant loading modes during crash of vehicle
transverse skin
structures.
This work has been performed within the VI Framework
Programme European Project APROSYS (Advanced
PROtection SYStems), whose main objective is increasing
the safety of all road-users. Aluminium foams, in fact, can x
offer interesting solution to increase the energy absorption longitudinal
capability in vehicle components.

2. Aluminium foam characteristics

z D block
The aluminium foam considered here was manufactured
by IFAM. The product emerging from IFAM process is a
foam block obtained through a powder metallurgical
y
process for preparing foamed metals. According to this
process, commercial powders are mixed with small Fig. 1. Block of foam.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
646 L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658

3. Cellular solids failure
In a material insensitive to the hydrostatic component of
stress shyd, as homogeneous metals are usually considered,
the failure limit in a deviatoric–hydrostatic space is a line
parallel to the hydrostatic stress axis. When the deviatoric
stress sdev reaches the yield line, yielding occurs. Therefore,
for metals it is possible to indefinitely increase the
hydrostatic stress without yielding. If this hypothesis can
be accepted, a single experimental test, excluding the
hydrostatic component, gives the complete yield locus for
this material.
The yield locus is different for foams [1–13], plastics,
and other engineering materials. As shown qualitatively in
Fig. 3, there is an influence of the hydrostatic stress
component [14,15]. Failure models able to describe the
yield locus have been addressed in several works, for
example Gibson and Zhang [1–4], Puso and Govindjee [5],
and Fu Chang [6].
Gibson [1,4], Hanssen [7] for aluminium foams, and
Zhang and Triantafillou [2,3] use an elliptic failure surface
in the deviatoric–hydrostatic space:
s  x 2 s 2
hyd 0
þ
dev
p1, (4)
a b
where shyd and sdev are the hydrostatic and deviatoric
components of the stress tensor previously defined, x0 is a
parameter defining the centre of the ellipse, a and b are the
size of the principal axis of this ellipse.
Deshpande and Fleck [8,9] and Christensen et al. [10]
assume an elliptical failure criterion plus a cut-off tensile

Table 1

Block Dimensions For production of samples for tests

(mm)

A 41  41  100 Compression tests on foam with skin

B 45  45  100 Compression tests on foam without skin
C +29  50 Hopkinson bar tests on foam with and
without skin
+25  50
D 120  310  45 Compression tests on foam without skin
Tensile tests on foam without skin
Hydro-compression and hydrostatic tests
on foam without skin
Torsion tests on foam without skin
E 41  41  500 Bending tests, samples without skin Fig. 3. Typical yield curve for hypothetic foam in the deviatoric–hydro-
F 45  45  500 Bending tests, samples with skin static stress components space. Note: Differently from usual, the
hydrostatic axis positive direction represents compression.

Fig. 2. Foam blocks from which the samples were obtained.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS
L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658 647

stress criterion in the principal material axes system:

s2 s2
 
1 1
T
 C
s11 þ T 11C þ Y12 2 p1,
s̄11 js11 j s̄11 js11 j ðs12 Þ
s11
p1, ð5Þ
s^ T11

where s11 and s12 are the stress component in the 12

coordinate system, s̄T11 and sC 11 the tensile and compressive
failure stress respectively, sY ^ T11 the tensile
12 the yield stress, s
rupture strength.
Gdoutos et al. used an elliptical failure curve by applying
Tsai-Wu theory [11]:

f 1 s1 þ f 3 s3 þ f 11 s21 þ f 33 s23 þ 2f 13 s1 s3 p1, (6)

where s1 and s3 are the principal stresses, f1, f3, f11, f33, and
f13 are experimentally obtained parameter of the failure
criterion.
Gibson et al. [1,12] used another failure criterion for
which the deviatoric stress components had a linear
influence:

!   !2
sdev r shyd
 þ 0:81 p1. (7)
spl ra spl

Therefore, a single experimental test is not enough to

completely characterize the material behaviour. Since
several parameters have to be determined to characterize
the full failure space, at least an equivalent number of
different experimental tests have to be performed. Conse-
quently, different tests are necessary in order to cover the
widest possible range of combinations of deviatoric and
hydrostatic stress components. The most relevant and
feasible tests are:
– tension/compression test, sdev/shyd ¼ 73;
– hydrostatic test, shyd ¼ p/3, sdev ¼ 0, sdev/shyd ¼ 0;
– pure shear test, shyd ¼ 0, sdev ¼ t/O3, sdev/shyd-N:
4-point asymmetric test, Iosipescu, or Arcan test
[11,13];
torsion test [10];
simple shear [4,18];
– generic biaxial/triaxial test, sdev/shydA[0,N]:
biaxial test [12];
hydro-compression and hydro-tension tests; and
combined tensile-compression/torsion [12,18], and
also hydrostatic [11].
The latter are free combinations of an independent
hydrostatic stress component and a compression/tension
independent load, which is achieved using a suitable test
apparatus that is able to control both load components
independently. The tests will be covered and discussed in
detail in the following section.
Fig. 4. Graphical overview of the experimental program.
4. Experimental program
The complete characterization of an aluminium foam
[7,9,10,16–18] was carried out in the Safety and Reliability
Laboratory of Politecnico di Torino. This work was
performed within the IP APROSYS. A qualitative over-
view of the experimental program for the aluminum foam
characterization is given in Fig. 4.
4.1. Compression tests
The quasi-static compression tests were carried out
under a general purpose hydraulic testing machine
(DARTEC HA100) controlled by a DARTEC 9600
electronic unit, performing both test control and data
acquisition. Measurements acquired within the 9600 unit
are then transferred to a personal computer by means of
dedicated software (DARTEC Toolkit 96). Load was
measured with a 100 kN, class A, strain-gage load cell
directly mounted on the testing machine. Stroke was
measured by means of a LVDT transducer directly
connected to the hydraulic actuator. Therefore, engineering
stress is obtained dividing the load values by the value of
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
648 L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658

the transverse area. Transverse area is evaluated from the
reported dimensional measurements. Average strain is
evaluated by dividing the stroke by the initial measured
length of the sample. Due to the manufacturing process, a
rigid face-sheet, usually called skin, up to 1 mm thick, is
obtained. Skin can affect the foam behaviour: therefore, its
effect was evaluated by removing it in some samples.
Quasi-static experimental tests on 41 mm 
41 mm  41 mm specimens without skin were carried out
on B- and D-series samples. The same tests on
41 mm  41 mm  41 mm specimens with skin were carried
out on A-series samples. A-series sample tests were aimed
at check influence of skin on the foam behaviour, since
foam with skin is used in composite structures. Since A, D
and B series specimens were obtained from a block it was
possible to define the specimen principal directions with
respect to the principal directions of the block (Fig. 2). The
experimental tests were carried out with different orienta-
tions of the specimen principal direction with respect to the
testing direction. This is shown in the pictorial representa-
tion of Fig. 5. The grey shade relates to the value of the
density of the sample extracted from the block. In each cell
the loading direction is also shown (TB ¼ top–bottom,
TR ¼ transverse, L ¼ longitudinal).
4.2. Tensile tests
The tensile tests were carried out under the same general
purpose hydraulic testing machine used in the quasi-static
compression tests. Compared to the very simple compres-
sion tests, the problem of holding the sample arises in
tension. After various attempt and different designs of the
specimen, it was concluded that the best and simplest
solution is to keep the simple constant section bar bonded
to two plane parallel surfaces of the test fixtures with a

Fig. 5. Pictorial representation of the properties distribution in a D foam block. Each cell is a sample cut from the block (D1 in this case): the plain
number represents the density in kg/dm3, while the bold number represents compression yield stress. The label inside the cells of the second and third rows
is the sample identification code: the first and fourth rows are spare samples not used. The color also is related to the sample density.

Fig. 6. Tensile tests set-up: on the left the test machine with the tensile tests equipment, on the right a detail of a sample mounted on the tension grip and
the transducer mounted for strain evaluation.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658
Fig. 7. Experimental apparatus for torsion test: on the left the torsion test equipment, on the right a detail of the mounting of the specimen on the rotating
loading plates.
Fig. 8. Specimen for torsion tests.
suitable adhesive (hot-curing one-component epoxy), as
shown in Fig. 6.
Engineering stress is obtained by dividing the load values
by the value of the unloaded cross sectional area. The
transverse area is evaluated from the dimensional measure-
ments reported. An additional LVDT was positioned
directly on the specimen in order to measure the specimen
elongation more accurately (Fig. 6). Quasi-static experi-
mental tests on 41 mm  41 mm  100 mm specimens with-
out skin were carried out on the D-series specimens. Since
the D-series specimens were obtained from a D block it was
possible to define the specimen principal directions with
respect to the principal directions of the block. The
experimental tests were carried out with the load applied
in the y direction.
4.3. Torsion tests
Torsion tests were performed, in order to obtain a pure
shear stress condition, with a torsion loading device which
has been already used to test joints. The experimental
testing device used for torsion tests is shown in Fig. 7. The
specimen is fixed to two circular plates. One plate, which
649
Fig. 9. Hydrostatic and hydro-compression tests area in the deviator-
ic–hydrostatic stress components space.
can rotate around its axis, is constrained to the chassis of
the testing device with a load cell that measures the torque
applied to the specimen. The other plate is connected to a
pneumatic rotary actuator which turns the plate and,
consequently, loads the specimen in torsion. This device
requires a particularly shaped specimen shown in the
following Fig. 8. It was obtained by machining a prismatic
piece of D-series foam in a lathe. The axis of the cylindrical
portion of the specimen is oriented in y direction of the D
block.
An alternative solution for shear loading is to use the
well known 4-point asymmetric loading set-up. In this case,
a pure shear loading is induced in the mid-section of a
parallelepiped specimen. However, in this case also it is
necessary to introduce a reduction in the mid section where
failure is to be induced (grooves or V-notches, like in
ASTM C1469-00). This is necessary to avoid bending
failure near the supports. In fact, in 4-point asymmetric
loading only the mid section is loaded in pure shear,
whereas every other transverse section is subjected both to
the same value of shear and to a bending moment which
linearly increases up to a maximum in the supports. If the
mid section is not weakened enough, another section will
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
650 L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658
fail due to a combination of shear stress and bending stress.
However, the reduction required to insure failure in the
mid-section will be generally too great if compared to the
average cell dimensions. The results would not be
significant unless an exceedingly large specimen is used.
4.4. Hydrostatic and hydro-compression tests
Hydrostatic compression tests were performed first to
assess the behaviour of the aluminium foam in a pure
hydrostatic stress condition. Then, hydro-compression
tests were carried out varying the ratio p ¼ sA/sR in order
to obtain different shyd–sdev combinations. As shown in
Fig. 9, by combining in different ways the axial stress sA
and the radial stress sR it is possible to investigate the
highlighted area of the shyd–sdev plane. The limits of this
area are the pure hydrostatic test (sA ¼ sR) and the pure
compression test (sR ¼ 0).
Performing hydrostatic and hydro-compression tests on
metal foam is a challenging task. The foam specimen has to
be completely separated from the fluid used to load it; for
this reason it was covered with a latex sheath in order to
avoid seepage of the fluid in the specimen. The cover has to
be strong enough not to break during the test and, at the
same time, it has to be very light and thin in order to avoid
effects on the test results. After a series of unsuccessful
trial, the best compromise to guarantee the integrity of the
impermeable latex sheath without excessive stiffening was
Fig. 10. Hydrostatic and hydro-compression tests set-up: on the left the hydrostatic test equipment mounted on the loading machine, on the right
schematics of the hydrostatic test equipment developed.
found covering the sample with a layer of flexible PVC
thermo retractable sheet.
Furthermore, in the hydro-compression tests it is
necessary to control the axial and the radial pressure
separately. For all these reasons a testing device (Fig. 10)
was designed and built expressly to perform these tests. The
test chamber, containing the foam specimen, was filled with
a fluid (mixture of water and ethylene glycol) and mounted
directly on the fixtures of a general purpose hydraulic
testing machine.
In the hydrostatic tests the specimen was placed on the
vertical rod connected to the testing machine. This rod
could move inside the test chamber in the axial direction
changing the volume of the chamber and, consequently, the
pressure of the fluid inside the chamber, i.e. the pressure on
the specimen.
In the hydro-compression tests the moving rod con-
nected to the hydraulic testing machine, was pressing the
specimen against a fixed rod inside the chamber, thus
generating the axial stress sA on the specimen. In parallel, a
double-acting pneumatic cylinder was connected to the
lateral surface of the test chamber. The rod of this piston
can move inside the test chamber in the radial direction
changing the volume of the chamber and, consequently, the
pressure inside the chamber generating the radial stress sR
on the specimen.
In both tests the electronic unit performed the test
control and the data acquisition, while a PC equipped with
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658
a National Instruments acquisition board was used to
acquire the load, stroke and pressure. In the hydro-
compression tests the PC carried out the control of the
radial pressure sR (pressure inside the test chamber) by
moving the piston rod, whose displacement was measured
through a potentiometer. The load applied by means of the
rod connected to the testing machine was measured with a
100 kN, class A, strain-gage load cell, while the stroke of
the rod was measured by means of a LVDT transducer
connected to the hydraulic actuator. The pressure inside
the chamber was measured with a 350 bar strain-gauge
pressure transducer applied to the chamber.
The specimens were cylinders cut from three D blocks,
identified as D2, D3 and D4 that were cut in seven sub-
blocks each to obtain the samples. These prismatic square
section sub-blocks were turned with a CNC lathe so that to
get circular cylindrical specimens with a nominal diameter
and height of 41 mm. Since in the quasi-static compression
tests an anisotropic behaviour of the specimens was found,
the specimens were machined in two different ways.
In those specimens obtained from block D2 the axial
direction was parallel to the top–bottom direction of the
block (Fig. 2). On the contrary, in the ones obtained from
blocks D3 and D4 the axial direction was parallel to the
transversal direction of the block (Fig. 2).
4.5. Split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) tests
In order to evaluate the effect of strain-rate on foam
behaviour, SHPB tests have been performed. The SHPB
arrangement is the classical arrangement used for compres-
sion tests [19]. The striker bar (projectile) hits the input bar
and generates a compressive stress pulse almost rectangu-
lar. After the stress wave has travelled along the input bar,
it reaches the specimen and loads it. A series of reflection
between the two faces of the specimen (the one in contact
with the striker bar and the other one in contact with the
output bar) occurs. After several (3–5) reflections, the
Fig. 11. Specimen for the HSPB tests in compression.
651
specimen is subjected to a homogeneous state of stress.
Being in equilibrium also with the output bar, there is a
stress wave generated into it. This stress wave (which is the
actual stress in the specimen) can be measured on the
surface of the output bar to evaluate the stress in the
specimen. It is easy to find that the stress and strain
generated by the reflection of the wave in the input bar are
proportional to the strain-rate in the specimen. By
integrating this strain-rate signal in time, the strain history
in the specimen is obtained. Since foams absorb a large
quantity of energy and reach high levels of strain, the
energy of a single stress wave is not sufficient. However, it
is possible to exploit the successive reflection of the wave at
the end of the output bar to repeatedly load the specimen
MPSHPB (Multiple Pulses SHPB) [19]. This allows to
reach very high levels of compression (up to 50%
approximately).
During the test, the foam is kept in place with adhesive
band (not shown in Fig. 11). The SPHB tests were
performed on C-series specimens with the load axis parallel
to the block x-axis, both on specimens with and without
skin and on composite specimens (aluminium tube 6060
+28 mm, thickness 2 mm with foam fill inserted). Static
and Taylor tests were also performed using C-series
samples (the Taylor test differs from the SHPB test for
the absence of the input bar: the striker bar directly impacts
the specimen, which is between the striker bar itself and the
output bar).
4.6. Dynamic impact tests
Tests have been performed under a drop tower testing
apparatus. The tower has a drop height of 12 m with a mass
range of 40–120 kg. Maximum available impact velocity is
about 14 m/s. The system is equipped with a three
piezoelectric 220 kN (bandwidth 30 kHz) load cells system
to measure the force and with an optoelectronic encoder
type speed transducer. The speed transducer, which is
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
652 L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658

essentially an incremental encoder, is also able to give a
measure of the stroke during the test. Force and speed
measurements are acquired with a dynamic analyzer
having a maximum acquisition rate of 800  103 samples/
s. Then, by using collected data, it is possible to retrieve the
global parameters, such as the mean impact force, the
efficiency and the absorbed energy.
The sledge is guided during free fall by rollers on two
rails. The impact plate is embedded in a concrete footing.
The tests were performed on A, and B type specimens with
the load axis parallel to the block x-axis, both on specimens
with and without skin and on composite specimens (as
described above).
collapse and maintains a constant bending moment in the
central section, between the two contact areas (see loading
scheme in Fig. 12, on the right). Normal force and
displacement of the punch were measured with a 100 kN
load cell and a displacement transducer respectively. A PC
controlled the machine operation and the force–displace-
ment data acquisition. The cross-head speed was fixed to
0.5 mm/s while the distance between the two supports was
250 mm. Bending tests have been performed on E and F
type specimens with the neutral axis parallel to the block
x-axis, both on specimens with and without skin and on
composite specimens (6060 aluminium tube 45  45 thick-
ness 2 mm with foam fill).

4.7. Bending tests 5. Results and analysis

Foams used in real applications, mainly automotive, to The results obtained from the tests on the foam alone are
improve energy absorption capability of crash beams and reported in the Figs. from 13 to 22.
other structural components, are subjected not only to Fig. 13 shows the results from uniaxial compression tests
axial loads but, often, to bending also. Therefore, it is on D type specimens with the load applied along the z
important to have information on the bending collapse of
aluminium foams and structures filled with aluminium Testing direction: top-bottom (z)
foams. Validation of material models can also profit from 50
this kind of experimental tests [20]. Many papers have
addressed the coupling of foams with aluminium and steel D1_01 0.36
40
columns, mainly under axial loading [7,21–26]. It is D1_03 0.54
Stress (MPa)

expected that similar strengthening effects are obtained in 30 D1_04 0.57

bending. D1_07 0.5
Bending tests have been performed using a Zwick Z100 20
D1_11 0.66
universal-testing machine (100 kN max load, 1300 mm
stroke) and a dedicated support frame (Fig. 12). The 10
loading frame consists of a rigid bar with two sliding
supports on which the specimen to be tested is placed. Each 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
sliding support consists of a short shaft of 30 mm diameter.
Engineering strain (-)
The load is transferred to the column by a punch with a
circular shape (50 mm radius) in the contact zone. The Fig. 13. Uniaxial compression stress–strain results, on D samples of
circular shape of the punch, with large radius, avoids local different density, loaded in top–bottom direction.

′=+ h
2
h
R′=R+
2

Fig. 12. Bending test.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS
L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658 653

16 12
14
10

Yield stress (MPa)

Yield stress (MPa)

12
8
10
8 6
6
4
4
2
2
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
3 3
Density (kg/dm ) Density (kg/dm )

16 Fig. 15. Failure stress components vs. density in tensile and torsion tests
on D samples.
14
Yield stress (MPa)

12
10
8
6 plastically even at very low values of the applied load.
4 Some results of the hydrostatic compression tests are
2 reported in Fig. 17. As for other test types, there is a strong
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Density (kg/dm3)
Fig. 14. Yield stress vs. density in uniaxial compression tests on D samples
with different orientation.
direction (as explained by Fig. 1). The results are reported
in terms of the stress–strain curves during compression up
to 90% engineering strain. First analysis of these experi-
mental results can be carried out examining the character-
istic points of each curve. The yield stress (Fig. 13) was
evaluated as the intersection of the two lines interpolating
the first part (elastic) and the second part (plateau) of the
experimental stress-strain curve. In Fig. 14 the yield stress
values are reported as a function of the density. In fact, the
results are strongly dependent on the apparent density
(average value within the volume of the sample which was
always reported in kg/dm3 together with the specimen
designation). Since there is a large scatter in size, wall
thickness and shape of the cells, the apparent density varied
considerably. Consequently, the test results are rather
scattered.
Moreover, the presence of structural anisotropy in the
specimens is evident in Fig. 14a. The yield stress in
compression is, in the top–bottom z direction, almost
half the value measured along the other x and y directions.
The influence of the presence of skin is also highlighted in
Fig. 14b.
Fig. 15 summarizes the results of tensile and torsion
tests. For these test configurations, the specimen failure
results from material fracture (Fig. 16) at relatively small
deformation (5–10%). Moreover, in tensile tests a clear
non-linear material behaviour was observed even at very
low values of stress. This behaviour was observable in all
the tests, and is probably due to the material non-
homogeneity with weak points which progressively fail
influence of density and a high scatter of the data.
0.8 However, a general behaviour can be detected: the elastic
modulus, the yield stress and the slope of the stress–strain
curve after yielding, all increase with increasing density.
Furthermore, the foam showed anisotropic behaviour,
which can be detected by examining the deformed shapes
of some specimens after the tests (Fig. 18). In specimen
H-D3-1 the cross section lies in the plane identified by the
longitudinal x and the top–bottom direction z (see Fig. 1
for the reference axis system). Because, as noted above,
along the top–bottom direction z the foam is weaker than
along the longitudinal direction x, the cross section
(initially circular) of the specimen becomes elliptical after
test (Fig. 18, left). This did not occur in the H-D2-2
specimen where the cross section lie in the plane defined by
the longitudinal x and transverse direction y, along which
the material has approximately the same strength. Conse-
quently, despite the slightly lower density, the yield stress
of specimens H-D3-1 is higher than H-D2-1 and H-D2-2.
The hydrostatic yield stress was evaluated the same way
as the uniaxial compression tests. For the same density
values, the yield stress is higher in the uniaxial compression
test than in hydrostatic (this will be discussed in details
later). In hydrostatic loading conditions, in fact, the cell
walls are subjected to additional bending load. Instead, the
densification rate is greater for the hydrostatic loading
condition since there is multiaxial load on the cells.
The hydro-compression tests were performed by apply-
ing a proportional load, i.e. a fixed ratio p ¼ sA/sR
(Fig. 19). In addition two hydro-compression static tests,
on specimen H-D3-1 and H-D3-2 (reported in the previous
section) were carried out simulating a hydrostatic test, i.e.
with a ratio p ¼ 1. Examining the results from these tests
(stress versus axial and radial strain), different behaviour in
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
654 L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658

Fig. 16. Tensile and torsion foam fracture.

30

25
Hydrostatic stress (MPa)

20

15

10

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Volumetric strain (-)

Fig. 17. Hydrostatic compression tests: stress–strain curves, D samples.

Fig. 18. Cross section of H-D3-1 (left) and H-D2-2 (right) samples after the tests.

the axial and radial directions is noted. This behaviour is
clearly shown in Fig. 20, where the results of test performed
on specimen H-D3-2 are reported. Since this test was
performed with the experimental device for the hydro-
compression tests, it was possible to evaluate the axial and
the radial characteristics separately. In Fig. 20, it is possible
to notice that, even if the load ratio p ¼ 1 was kept at a
constant level during the test (equivalent points on the two
curves have same ordinate but different abscissa, as
suggested by the horizontal double tailed arrows), the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658 655

12 14

10 12
Yield stress (MPa)

8 10

Yield Stress (MPa)

6 8

4 6 Static
2 Taylor Impact Test
4
SHPB modified
0 linear fit
2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 95% band error
Density (kg/dm3) 0
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fig. 19. Hydro-compression tests results: variation of the yield stress with
Density (kg/dm3)
density.
Fig. 22. Yield stress vs. foam density and deformation energy vs. foam
density in different uniaxial compression tests.
Radial strain (-)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
8 This event is rather clear in the hydrostatic tests, while in
Axial and radial stress (MPa)

7 Axial the hydro-compression tests it was hardly observed.

6 For the SHPB tests, the maximum achievable strain with
Radial a single impact was lower than the maximum strain
5
imposed in the quasi-static tests, since the total amount
4
of available impact energy is limited and fixed a priori.
3 Multiple impacts can increase the total applied energy, and
2 multiply the compression level, but for no more than four
1 pulses. Fig. 21 shows the mechanical characteristics
0 obtained from the SHPB test for two series of specimens
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 with different densities. By analyzing the experimental data
Axial strain (-) it can be observed that results are sufficiently repeatable
(considering results from samples with comparable density)
Fig. 20. Hydrostatic test (p ¼ 1) on specimen H-D3-2.
and that the results dispersion is due to the variability of
the material intrinsic properties, mainly the density.
35 The strain-rate achieved in the tests was about 800 1/s.
Due to the high variability in effective density, even with
30
a reasonable number of repetitions of tests at the same
25 nominal density, it was not easy to distinguish the effect of
the different influencing factors. That is, it has not been
Stress (MPa)

20 possible to analyze specimens with the same density with

15
10
5 experimental results, with a sufficiently narrow scatter
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Fig. 21. SHPB compression test results.
axial and the radial yield stresses were quite different. This
means that the ratio between the axial yield stress and the
radial yield stress was different from the imposed ratio p.
When yield occurs in the radial direction (at around 2 MPa,
radial strain starts increasing much more than axial strain)
the material behaves linearly again in the axial direction.
all the different testing equipment. For this reason, the
variation of the yield load as a function of the effective
density of the samples, is reported in Fig. 22. A linear
relationship in a semi-logarithmic plane can describe the
band.
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
In order to evaluate the global foam behaviour in the
Strain
different multiaxial load conditions, the results from all
the tests may be represented on a shyd–sdev diagram, as in
Fig. 3. Fig. 23 compiles all the experimental results, in
terms of the failure load in tensile and torsion tests, and of
the yield load in compression (uniaxial and hydrostatic).
The scatter due to density variations and anisotropy make
any clear data interpretation difficult.
Instead, the results must be analyzed taking into account
the density variation and the material orientation, as
shown in Fig. 24. The data corresponding to the various
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
656 L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658

14 -90
-80

Compression load (KN)

12
Tension Compression -70
Deviatoric stress (MPa)

10 -60
-50
Biaxial-Compression
8 -40 Tube with foam
Shear

Tube+Foam
-30 Foam
6
-20
4 -10 Tube
Hydro-Compression
0
2 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70
Displacement (mm)
Hydrostatic
0
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 Fig. 25. Compression load–displacement tests results on composite
Hydrostatic stress (MPa) structure.

Fig. 23. Failure locus of tested aluminium foam.

100
Square tube & foam A8 0.55
90
16 Square tube & foam A13 0.61
80
14 Square tube & foam A6 0.61 static
70
Square tube & foam A7 0.56 static
Load (KN)

60
Deviatoric stress (MPa)

12
50
10 40
8 30
20
6 10
Shear

4 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
2 Stroke (mm)

0 Fig. 26. Dynamic compression load–displacement tests results on

3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 composite structure.
Hydrostatic stress (MPa)

Fig. 24. Failure loci of tested aluminum foam, considering the effect of
the density and material orientation. The two sets of three curves
correspond to the three characteristic foam densities of 0.50, 0.55, and
0.60 kg/dm3, as indicated in the legend, and for the two main loading
directions parallel to y and z, as in the legend.
loading conditions were obtained by interpolating the
experimental results at three different density values (0.50,
0.55, 0.60 kg/dm3). A second classification is based on the
sample axis (axis refers to the main loading direction).
There are two cases: (1) the sample axis is along the major
strength directions (that is, the x and y directions); (2) the
sample axis is along the minor strength direction (that is,
the z direction or top–bottom direction).
The foam behaviour seems to be described by an elliptic
limit curve, with a shift in the deviatoric. By applying the fit
with Eq. (4) [1–4,7], the failure limit curves for the three
densities, and for the two sample axes are obtained as in
Fig. 24. The shear test results do not match the two families
of curves, since they do not belong to either case. In shear
stress loading by torsion the principal directions are at 451
with respect to the sample axis, therefore, the effect of
loading in the two directions is combined.
For the tests performed on the composite structures
made of the aluminium foam filled extrusions, the results
are in agreement with those obtained on the cellular solid
material only. In compression, the stress in the foam
continues to be mostly compression type (the presence of
the constraint imposed by the tube add triaxiality to the
state of stress), with absence of fracture. This leads to very
high energy absorption, much higher than the sum of the
energy that can be potentially accumulated by the two sub-
elements (foam and tube), as it is evident in Fig. 25. This is
essentially due to the interaction of the tube with the foam,
which causes a variation of the tube collapse mode. The
behaviour is similar in the dynamic tests (Fig. 26): due to
the absence of influence of the strain-rate on the aluminium
foam behaviour and on the tube aluminium alloy, the
results of the dynamic tests are substantially in agreement
with those of the static tests. Only a slight increase of the
collapse loads due to inertia effects is present.
In the case of flexure (Fig. 27), tensile stresses produce
fracture in the tensile zone. Consequently, the behaviour of
the foam alone (with or without skin) is in agreement with
the results of tensile tests, which leads to very low energy

L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658
12
10
Tube with foam
8 in the evaluations of the mechanical properties and of the
Load (kN)
6 the real applications. A second aspect that has been
Tube
4 tion has been identified along the main foaming direction.
Foam with skin
2
Foam without
skin
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03
Stroke (m)
Fig. 27. Bending tests results.
absorption. The combination of the foam with the tube
allows having a composite structure with high energetic
absorption and collapse load, if compared with the basis
elements (Fig. 27). The foam presence, in fact, produces a
substantial change in the tube collapse mechanism.
Even if the foam fractures, the effect of internal
constraint of the tube gives some benefits for the energetic
absorption, avoiding the formation of the well known
bending collapse mechanism (with consequent decrease of
the resistant load). However, the new collapse mechanism
increases the tensile stresses in the tube walls: with higher
rotations. This causes the fracture of the tube, with
consequent sudden decrease of the load and of the capacity
of further energy absorption. This situation is made worse
by the reduced fracture deformations of the aluminium
alloys for extrusion.
6. Conclusions
The full multiaxial characterization of a cellular metallic
material, which required a series of tests in tension,
compression, torsion, and hydrostatic loading, proved to
be a challenging task. Especially, in tests with hydrostatic
component, the isolation of the specimen from the fluid
used to load it was particularly difficult. In many tests, the
cover used to protect the specimen from seepage of the
fluid failed and the fluid penetrated into the specimen
causing an early end of the test. For this reason, large
body of experimental work was carried out in order to
set up the testing devices and procedure. To check whether
there the strain-rate influenced the material behaviour,
tests in a SHPB apparatus were also performed. Finally,
since the material is meant to be used in crash applications
to increase energy absorption of vehicle structures, some
tests of a simple composite structure made of an aluminium
tube filled by the aluminium foam were carried out. Both
in axial compression and in bending, the contribution of
the foam is quite important, more than the pure addition of
ARTICLE IN PRESS
657
the contributions of the two materials to the absorbed
energy.
A primary issue in the analysis of such type of material is
the large density scatter: this caused many serious problems
effects of density. Moreover, it will be a serious problem in
pointed out is the material anisotropy: a weaker orienta-
This was well evident in the hydrostatic tests, where a
circular cylindrical specimen deforms into an elliptical
cylinder, and in the hydro-compression tests, where, if
0.04 0.05 simulating an hydrostatic state of stress with three equal
values of stress acting along three orthogonal directions,
yield collapse occurs at different strain levels in the
different directions.
Tensile failure was investigated by means of tensile and
shear (torsion) tests. In both cases there is brittle fracture
after yield. Stiffness and yield strength in tension are
comparable with the values observed in compression. By
comparing tensile and shear test results, it comes that the
value of the deviatoric stress at failure does not change
significantly. Therefore, a positive hydrostatic stress seems
not to affect the failure of the foam.
From the results of these tests it has been possible to
obtain the yield locus of the aluminium foam in the
deviatoric–hydrostatic stress components space. One of the
most important variation factors is the density, which,
unfortunately is not sufficiently constant in the material
sample. The density variation is, therefore, to be taken into
account in the design of components with aluminium foam
in it.
Finally, a series of dynamic tests were performed on the
aluminium foam examined. The data obtained by dynamic
tests do not differ from the trend of static tests results,
taking into account the density variations. It may be stated
that the analyzed metallic foam does not present any
significant dependence on the strain-rate.
However, even if the analysis is not extended to a
complete model of the foam behaviour in all the possible
loading configurations, the results presented here and
the model describing the yield locus in the deviatoric–
hydrostatic plane, are a sound basis for the description of
this material for design in structural applications.
Acknowledgements
This work was performed within the Subproject 7
‘‘Virtual Testing’’ of the FP6 European Project
APROSYS. The financial support of the European
Commission by means of the APROSYS project and Dirk
Lehmhus of Fraunhofer-Institute for Applied Materials
Research (IFAM, Germany) are gratefully acknowledged.
Thanks also to the co-ordinator of the subproject, Dr.
Kambiz Kayvantash of Mecalog (France) and to the
workpackage 7.1 leader Mr. Roberto Puppini of Fiat
Research Center (Italy).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
658 L. Peroni et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 35 (2008) 644–658
References
[1] Gibson LJ, Ashby MF. Cellular solids. Structure and properties.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1997.
[2] Gibson LJ, Ashby MF, Zhang J, Triantafillou TC. Failure surfaces
for cellular materials under multiaxial loads—I. Modelling. Int J
Mech Sci 1989;31:635–63.
[3] Triantafillou TC, Zhang J, Shercliff TL, Gibson LJ, Ashby MF.
Failure surfaces for cellular materials under multiaxial loads—II.
Comparison of models with experiments. Int J Mech Sci 1989;31:
665–78.
[4] Zhang J, Kikuchi N, Li V, Yee A, Nusholtz G. Constitutive modeling
of polymeric foam material subjected to dynamic crash loading. Int J
Impact Eng 1998;21(5):369–86.
[5] Puso MA, Govindjee S. A phenomenological constitutive model for
rigid polymeric foam. Mech Plast Plast Compos 1995;MD 68/AMD
215:134–7.
[6] Fu C, Song Y, Lu DX, DeSilva CN. Unified constitutive equations of
foam materials. Trans ASME 1998;120:212–7.
[7] Hanssen AJ, Langseth M, Hopperstad OS. Crash behavior of foam-
based components: validation of numerical simulations. Adv Eng
Math 2002;4(10):771–6 doi:10.1002/1527-2648(20021014)4:10o771::
AID-ADEM77143.0.CO;2-Y.
[8] Deshpande VS, Fleck NA. Isotropic constitutive models for metallic
foams. J Mech Phys Solid 2000;48(6–7):1253–83.
[9] Deshpande VS, Fleck NA. Multiaxial yield behaviour of polymer
foams. Acta Mater 2001;49(10):1859–66.
[10] Christensen RM, Freeman DC, DeTeresa SJ. Failure criteria for
isotropic materials, applications to low-density types. Int J Solids
Struct 2002;39(4):973–82.
[11] Gdoutos EE, Daniel IM, Wang K-A. Failure of cellular foams under
multiaxial loading. Compos Appl Sci Manuf 2003;33(2):163–76.
[12] Gioux G, McCormack TM, Gibson LJ. Failure of aluminum foams
under multiaxial loads. Int J Mech Sci 2000;42(6):1097–117.
[13] Doyoyo M, Wierzbicki T. Experimental studies on the yield behavior
of ductile and brittle aluminum foams. Int J Plast 2003;198:
1195–1214. doi:10.1016/S0749-6419(02)00017-7.
[14] Collins JA. Failure of materials in mechanical design. New York:
Wiley; 1980.
[15] Khan AS, Huang S. Continuum theory of plasticity. New York:
Wiley; 1995.
[16] Ashby MF, Evans A, Fleck NA, Gibson LJ, Hutchinson JW, Wadley
HNG. Metal foams: a design guide. Boston: Butterworth, Heine-
mann; 2000.
[17] Ehlers W, Mullerschon H, Klar O. On the behaviour of aluminium
foams under uniaxial and multiaxial loading. In: Banhart J, Ashby
MF, Fleck NA, editors. Proceedings of the international conference
on metal structures. Bremen, Berlin, Germany: MIT; 1999. p. 255–62.
[18] Blazy J-S, Marie-Louise A, Forest S, Chastel Y, Pineau A, Awade A,
et al. Deformation and fracture of aluminium foams under
proportional and nonproportional multi-axial loading: statistical
analysis and size effect. Int J Mech Sci 2004;46(2):217–44.
[19] Peroni M, Peroni L, Avalle M. High strain-rate compression test on
metallic foam using a multiple pulse SHPB apparatus. In: Cirne J,
Dormeval R, et al., editors. Proceedings of the eighth international
conference on mechanical and physical behaviour of materials under
dynamic loading (DYMAT 2006), France. J. Phys. IV 2006;134:
609–16, doi:10.1051/jp4:2006134094.
[20] Reyes A, Hopperstad OS, Hanssen AG, Langseth M. Modeling of
material failure in foam-based components. Int J Impact Eng 2004;
30(7):805–34.
[21] Langseth M, Hopperstad OS, Hanssen AG. Crash behaviour of thin-
walled aluminium members. Thin Wall Struct 1998;32(1–3):127–50.
[22] Hanssen AG, Langseth M, Hopperstad OS. Static crushing of square
aluminium extrusions with aluminium foam filler. Int J Mech Sci
1999;41(8):967–93.
[23] Hanssen AG, Langseth M, Hopperstad OS. Static and dynamic
crushing of square aluminium extrusions with aluminium foam filler.
Int J Impact Eng 2000;24(4):347–83.
[24] Hanssen AG, Langseth M, Hopperstad OS. Static and dynamic
crushing of circular aluminium extrusions with aluminium foam filler.
Int J Impact Eng 2000;24(5):475–507.
[25] Hanssen AG, Langseth M, Hopperstad OS. Optimum design for
energy absorption of square aluminium columns with aluminium
foam. Int J Mech Sci 2001;43(1):153–76.
[26] Santosa SP, Wierzbicki T, Hanssen AG, Langseth M. Experimental
and numerical studies of foam-filled sections. Int J Impact Eng 2000;
24(5):509–34.