Review Manufacture of Polymeric Foam Cores For Sandwich Structures of Complex Shape

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/352898894
A review on manufacture of polymeric foam cores for sandwich structures of

complex shape in automotive applications
Article in Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials · June 2021

DOI: 10.1177/10996362211030564
CITATIONS READS
13 542
2 authors:
Youming Chen Raj Das

Wuhan University of Technology RMIT University
13 PUBLICATIONS 289 CITATIONS 302 PUBLICATIONS 4,526 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Aircraft Sustainment and Repair View project
Development of light gauge steel truss portal framing system View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Youming Chen on 31 August 2021.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials
Fo
A Review on Manufacture of Polymeric Foam Cores for

Sandwich Structures of Complex Shape in Automotive
Applications
rP
Journal: Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials

ee
Manuscript ID JSSM-20-0364.R2
Manuscript Type: Standard Article

rR
Date Submitted by the

25-May-2021
Author:
ev
Complete List of Authors: Chen, Youming; Wuhan University of Technology,

Das, Raj; RMIT University
Sandwich structures, Thermoforming, Foam injection moulding, Bead

Keywords:
iew
foaming, Film foaming
In this work, polymeric foam thermoforming, foam injection moulding,

bead foaming and film foaming were reviewed in an effort to explore
feasible processes to manufacture sandwich structures of complex
geometry for automotive applications. Injection moulded foams generally
suffer from high density, poor cell morphologies and unnecessary skin
layers. Foamable films currently available are pressure-induced. In order
for foamable films to produce foam, high uniformly-distributed pressure
needs to be applied, which makes it difficult to manufacture foam parts
of three-dimensional complex geometry with foamable films. The
majority of commercial high-performance foam cores can be
Abstract: thermoformed. Ideally, thermoformed foam cores would have good
mechanical properties if high-performance foam sheets are used.
However, the mechanical properties of foams might be reduced during
the process of thermoforming, especially around corners. Bead foaming
offers a high level of freedom in foam geometry to be moulded, and
inserts can be integrated into foam cores during the process of
moulding. Moreover, foam cores with high density in high stressed areas
and low density in low stressed areas can be manufactured with foam
beads of different densities. However, due to nonhomogeneous degree of
fusion and weak bonds and voids between beads, bead foams generally
show mechanical properties lower than their block counterpart.
hhttp://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jssm
Page 1 of 32 Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials
1
2
3
Relatively speaking, thermoforming with high-performance foam sheets
4 and moulding with high-performance foam beads hold great potentials
5 for mass production of sandwich cores of complex geometry for
6 automotive applications. However, further investigation on the
7 mechanical properties of thermoformed foams and high-performance
8 bead foams is still in need to confirm their suitability.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP
24
25
26
ee
27
28
29
rR
30
31
32
ev
33
34
35
36
iew
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60 hhttp://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jssm
Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials Page 2 of 32
1
2
3 A Review on Manufacture of Polymeric Foam Cores for Sandwich Structures of
4 Complex Shape in Automotive Applications
5
6 Youming Chen*1 and Raj Das2
7 1Hubei Key Laboratory of Advanced Technology for Automotive Components, School of Automotive
8
Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China
9
10 2SirLawrence Wackett Aerospace Research Centre, School of Engineering, RMIT University, 124
11 La Trobe Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
12
13 Abstract
14
15 In this work, polymeric foam thermoforming, foam injection moulding, bead foaming and
16
film foaming were reviewed in an effort to explore feasible processes to manufacture
17
18 sandwich structures of complex geometry for automotive applications. Injection moulded
19
foams generally suffer from high density, poor cell morphologies and unnecessary skin layers.
Fo
20
21 Foamable films currently available are pressure-induced. In order for foamable films to
22
23 produce foam, high uniformly-distributed pressure needs to be applied, which makes it
rP
24
25
difficult to manufacture foam parts of three-dimensional complex geometry with foamable
26 films. The majority of commercial high-performance foam cores can be thermoformed.
ee
27
28 Ideally, thermoformed foam cores would have good mechanical properties if high-
29
performance foam sheets are used. However, the mechanical properties of foams might be
rR
30
31 reduced during the process of thermoforming, especially around corners. Bead foaming offers
32
a high level of freedom in foam geometry to be moulded, and inserts can be integrated into
ev
33
34 foam cores during the process of moulding. Moreover, foam cores with high density in high
35
36
iew
stressed areas and low density in low stressed areas can be manufactured with foam beads of
37
38
different densities. However, due to nonhomogeneous degree of fusion and weak bonds and
39 voids between beads, bead foams generally show mechanical properties lower than their
40
41 block counterpart. Relatively speaking, thermoforming with high-performance foam sheets
42 and moulding with high-performance foam beads hold great potentials for mass production of
43
44 sandwich cores of complex geometry for automotive applications. However, further
45
46 investigation on the mechanical properties of thermoformed foams and high-performance
47 bead foams is still in need to confirm their suitability.
48
49
Keywords: Sandwich structures; Thermoforming; Foam injection moulding; Bead foaming;
50
51 Film foaming.
52
53 *Corresponding author address: School of Automotive Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, China. Tel:
54 +86 18707141689. Fax: +86 02787858200. E-mail: youmingchen@foxmail.com.
55
56
57
58 1
59
1
2
3
4
1. Introduction
5 A sandwich structure is a lightweight structural element that comprises two thin but stiff skins
6
7 (such as composite laminates, metal plates, etc.) bonded to a relatively thick and lightweight
8
9 core material (such as foams, honeycombs, balsa woods, corrugated core, etc.). The
10 lightweight core keeps the two skins separated and thus increases the moment of inertia of the
11
12 structure with little increase in weight. As a result, sandwich structures have high specific
13
flexural stiffness and strength [1] and thus are widely used in aerospace, aircraft, marine,
14
15 automotive, wind turbines and sports industries to reduce weight.
16
17 Sandwich structures are often used in the form of flat or slightly curved panels. But, there are
18
19 many cases in which sandwich structures of complex three-dimensional (3D) geometry are
Fo
20
21 needed, for instance, boat hulls [2, 3], rocket fairings [4], aircraft fairings and bulkheads [4],
22 the front shields of high-speed trains [5, 6], containers and storage tanks [7], floor
23
rP
24 components of vehicles [8], etc. Compared to flat sandwich panels, sandwich structures of
25
complex 3D geometry are more difficult to manufacture, partly because cores of complex 3D
26
ee
27 shape are required. Commercial core materials including high-performance foams,

28
29 honeycombs and balsa wood are produced as blocks and sliced into sheets of various
rR
30 thicknesses for use. Cores of complex shape can be cut out from a block of core by machining.
31
32 However, this method leads to excessive waste of materials and thus high cost. Therefore, it
ev
33
34 mainly suits for low-volume production and high value-added products. Foam and
35 honeycomb sheets generally have a degree of flexibility. With a certain amount of pressure
36
iew
37 applied to, they can be shaped into a 3D geometry at room temperature [9, 10], known as cold
38
forming. However, this method is only able to manufacture cores of small curvatures. Cutting
39
40 grooves on the surfaces of core sheets is a common practice for foam and balsa wood [10-15],
41
42 which increases the flexibility of core sheets and allow them to form complex geometry. The
43 grooves cut on surfaces also act as flow channels during the process of manufacturing
44
45 sandwich panels to guide resin flow. However, the flexibility increased by cutting grooves is
46
47 still limited. Additionally, resin filled the grooves adds extra weights to sandwich structures,
48 and unfilled or partially filled grooves may generate weak spots for stress concentration and
49
50 possible premature failure of sandwich structures. Hence, this approach is only suitable for
51
manufacturing cores of relatively simple geometry as well.
52
53
54 Polymeric foam and honeycomb sheets can be thermoformed into a certain shape [2, 7, 8, 10,
55 12, 16-24], in which sheets are heated to a softening temperature and then shaped with a
56
57
58 2
59
1
2
3 vacuum or mechanical pressure. Compared to cold forming, thermoforming can fabricate
4
5 cores of higher curvatures. Moreover, thermoforming requires minimal tooling, and it is a
6 relatively economical and efficient process. When a full sandwich structure (including the
7
8 skins and the core) is thermoformed in one single step, cycle time can be significantly reduced
9
[18-20]. Thermoforming with honeycombs could cause severe cell collapse [25, 26] and thus
10
11 reduction in strength. Additionally, honeycombs generally have limitations relating to proper
12
13 bonding and moisture accumulation. Hence, honeycombs might not be an optimum core for
14 mass production of sandwich structures of complex 3D geometry. The thermoforming process
15
16 discussed in the present study is limited to polymeric foams only.
17
18 Foam cores with complex geometry can also be manufactured by in-mould foaming, such as
19
Fo
20 injection moulding [27-51], bead foaming [52-63] and film foaming [64-69]. With in-mould
21
foaming, foam cores of complex shape can be fabricated without much material waste.
22
23
rP
Moreover, inserts such as connecting elements and ribbings can be integrated into foam cores
24
25 during the process of foaming. Furthermore, foam cores with pre-defined density distributions,
26
ee
such as high and low densities in potential highly and lowly stressed areas, respectively, can
27
28 be produced with in-mould foaming. Lastly, when foaming takes place between two skins,
29
rR
30
fusion bond between the skins and the foam core can be generated (especially when the skins
31 and foam core are based on the same matrix), leading to high bonding strengths [70].
32
ev
33
The automotive industry has been exploring new materials and manufacturing processes to
34
35 reduce weight without compromising the performance and safety of vehicles for decades,
36
iew
37 Composite sandwich structures are deemed to be an ideal alternative to conventional materials,

38 such as steel and aluminium in some parts [8, 71, 72], due to their high specific flexural
39
40 stiffness and strength, excellent thermal and acoustic isolations and great impact energy
41
42
absorption. However, there is a lack of established processes to manufacture composite
43 sandwich structures of complex geometry for automotive application to date [8, 71].
44
45 Thermoforming and in-mould foaming techniques are efficient and economical in
46 manufacturing cores of sandwich structures of complex shape and thus hold great potentials
47
48 for high-volume production of sandwich structures for automotive applications. In this paper
49
50 a comprehensive review on the thermoforming of polymeric foams and in-mould foaming
51 techniques will be provided in an effort to evaluate viable processes to manufacture sandwich
52
53 structures of complex geometry for automotive applications.
54
55 2. Thermoforming of foam cores
56
57
58 3
59
1
2
3 Foam cores of interest to the automotive industry are foams of a thickness around 10 mm, a
4
5 density in the range of 100-200 kg/m3 and a compressive strength sufficient to withstand the
6 pressure applied in the subsequent manufacturing processes, such as high-pressure resin
7
8 transfer moulding (HP-RTM) and wet pressing [8]. High-performance foam cores that are
9
commonly used nowadays such as polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polymethacrylimide (PMI),
10
11 styrene-acrylonitrile (SAN), Polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyetherimide (PEI),
12
13 polyethersulphone (PES) foams meet the requirements for density and mechanical properties.
14 Additionally, PET, PEI and PES foams have excellent anti fire properties, making them even
15
16 more desirable to automotive applications. The majority of high-performance foam cores are
17
18
thermoplastic and can be thermoformed into a complex shape.
19
Fo
20 2.1 Thermoforming process
21
22 Sandwich structures of complex 3D geometry can be manufactured either by thermoforming
23
rP
the foam core into the required shape first and then joining the core with the skins in a
24
25 separate step or by direct thermoforming the foam core and the skins into the required shape
26
ee
27 in a single step process. In this section, these two methods are presented.
28
29 2.1.1 Thermoforming of foam cores only and subsequent joining with skins
rR
30
31 When thermoformed alone, a foam core is heated to a softening temperature (see Figure 1a),
32
and then either compression moulded in the heating environment or quickly shifted to a
ev
33
34 separate mould for forming (see Figure 1b). Forming pressure is usually applied via a two-
35
36 part mould or a vacuum bag. After forming, the foam core is cooled and ejected from the
iew
37
mould (see Figure 1c). With the thermoformed foam core, a sandwich structure of complex
38
39 geometry can be fabricated using resin infusion, vacuum bagging consolidation, wet pressing,
40
41 compression moulding or resin transfer moulding methods (see Figure 1d). Coombs [7]
42 thermoformed 25 mm thick PES foam sheets into 90o bends with an inner radius of 25 and 50
43
44 mm in an environmental chamber at a temperature of 200 oC and then manufactured curved
45
46 sandwich panels (as shown in Figure 2) by attaching thermoset (epoxy/flax) and thermoplastic
47 (polypropylene/flax) composite skins to the thermoformed foam bends using resin infusion
48
49 and vacuum bagging methods, respectively. It was found that epoxy resin flew into the top
50
layer of open cells of the foam core, resulting in a strong bond between the core and skins,
51
52 while polypropylene (PP) did not flow into the open cells of the top layer owing to the high
53
54 viscosity of PP melt, leading to reduced interfacial bond strength.
55
56
57
58 4
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 (a) (b)
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP
(c) (d)
24
25 Figure 1: Schematics of thermoforming of foam cores: (a) heating in an environmental chamber; (b) forming; (c)
thermoformed foam; (d) joining the formed foam core with skins.
26
ee
27
28
29
rR
30
31
32
ev
33
34
35
36
iew
37
38
39 (a) (b)
40 Figure 2: (a) curved epoxy/flax sandwich panel; (a) curved PP/flax sandwich panel [7].
41
42
2.1.2 Thermoforming of sandwich structures in one step
43
44 When thermoplastic composites are utilized as the skins of sandwich structures, foam cores
45
46 can be thermoformed into the required shape together with the skins [18, 19, 70]. In this way,
47
48
a sandwich structure of complex 3D geometry is manufactured in one single step, and a
49 separate step of joining together the core and the skins is avoided. Therefore, it significantly
50
51 reduces the cycle time of production and the number of processing tools required. During the
52
one-step process, two thermoplastic composite skins and a foam core are stacked and heated
53
54 to a softening temperature and then rapidly transferred into a press for forming. After forming,
55
56 the sandwich part is cooled and subsequently ejected from the mould, as shown in Figure 3.
57
58 5
59
1
2
3 Additional polymer films can be added in between the skins and the core to improve the bond
4
5 between them [18, 19]. When the composite skins and foam core are of the same matrix, a
6 fusion bond can be generated between them, leading to an improved bond strength [70].
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 (a) (b)
18
19
Fo
20
21 (c)
22
Figure 3: Schematics of thermoforming sandwich structures in one step: (a) heating; (b) forming; (c)
23
rP
thermoformed sandwich part.

24
25
26 However, processing conditions for manufacturing sandwich structures in one step are more
ee
27 demanding. As the thermoplastic skins need a certain amount of pressure to consolidate and
28
29 foam cells collapse if a pressure exceeding its compressive strength is applied, the forming
rR
30
pressure needs to be kept higher than the minimum consolidation pressure of the skins, but
31
32 lower than the compressive strength of the foam core [18]. Likewise, there is a window of
ev
33
34 temperature for thermoforming as well. For foam cores, low forming temperatures might
35 cause rupture and spring-back, while high forming temperatures might lead to warp, swell,
36
iew
37 cell collapse and thermal degradation of materials [7, 18, 20]. For the thermoplastic skins,
38
39 they might be too rigid to be formed or poor bonding between the skins and the core might
40 occur if the forming temperature is too low, while thermal degradation of materials and
41
42 deconsolidation (associated with increases in thickness and void content of the skins) might
43
occur if the forming temperature is too high [18, 20, 70, 73-75]. Usually, foam cores are
44
45 heated to a temperature slightly below the glass transition temperature (Tg) of their matrix,
46
47 and thermoplastic skins are heated to above the glass transition temperature of their matrix.
48 The processing windows of temperature and pressure for thermoforming a thermoplastic
49
50 sandwich structure is schematically shown in Figure 4.
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58 6
59
1
2
3
Temperature
4
5 Thermal degradation
6
7
Deconsolidation Face sheets forming
8
of face sheets
9 window
10
Rigidity limitation
11 Tg
12 Minimum Cell collapse Collapsing
13 forming pressure
14 pressure
Foam forming window
15 Foam fracture
16
17
18
Pressure
19
Figure 4: Schematic of a processing window for thermoforming of a thermoplastic sandwich structure.
Fo
20
21
22 For some combinations of skins and cores, there is a temperature zone overlapping between
23
rP
the windows of forming temperature of the cores and the skins. In this case, they can be
24
25 thermoformed with one-stage heating. For instance, Breuer et al. [19] manufactured a
26
ee
27
sandwich hemisphere with glass fabric pre-impregnated with a polyamide-12 matrix (melting
28 point at 178 oC) and PMI foam (softening temperature at 180 oC). It was found that
29
rR
30 temperatures higher than 190 oC in the PMI foam lead to undesired post-foaming and
31
expansion, while temperatures lower than 180 oC might cause fracture of the PMI foam.
32
ev
33 Temperatures above 260 oC at the skins lead to oxidation and deconsolidation, whilst
34
35 temperatures below 185 oC might cause dimensional imperfections. Therefore, the stack of
36
iew
the composite skins and PMI foam core was heated at a temperature of 260 oC. When the
37
38 interfaces between the skins and core reached a temperature of 185 oC, the stack was rapidly
39
40
transferred into a mould for forming.
41
42 Nevertheless, in some cases, there might be no overlapping between the windows of forming
43
temperatures of the skins and foam core. In this context, a two-stage heating strategy [18, 20]
44
45 might be needed, in which the stack of the skins and foam core is first heated at a low
46
47 temperature and then at a high temperature for a short time. The second stage of heating aims
48 to heat the thermoplastic skins preferentially. The foam core is also heated during the second
49
50 stage of heating, but to a much less extent, due to the low thermal conductivity of the foam
51
52
core and high heat resistance at the skin-foam interface. After the second stage of heating, the
53 foam core remains within the window of forming temperature. Rozant et al. [18, 20]
54
55 manufactured 3D sandwich parts by direct thermoforming of a PEI foam core and fabric-
56 reinforced PEI skins with two-stage heating. The PEI foam core needs to be heated to a
57
58 7
59
1
2
3 temperature between 165 oC and 185 oC, whilst the fabric-reinforced PEI skins need to be
4
5 heated to a temperature above 280 oC. To heat the skins and core to their respective forming
6 temperatures, the stack of the skins and the core was first heated at a temperature of 165 oC.
7
8 Once thermal equilibrium was achieved in the foam, the stack was transferred to a second set
9
of heating plates at 320 oC. As soon as the temperature of the skins reached 320 oC, the stack
10
11 was transferred into a mould for forming. In this way, double-curved sandwich parts were
12
13 successfully manufactured.
14
15 When thermoplastic sandwich structures are thermoformed in one step, the foam core and
16
17
skins are joined during forming. To achieve a good bond between them, one constituent of the
18 sandwich structures, preferably the skins, needs to be heated up to the melting point of its
19
Fo
20 matrix so that there will be polymer melt to flow into the open cells at the top layer of the
21
foam core, forming mechanical interlocking and adhesive bonding between the skins and
22
23
rP
foam core [70, 76, 77]. If the matrix of the skins has a high melting point, a thermoset or
24
25 thermoplastic film of melting temperature lower than that of the skins can be placed in
26
ee
between the skins and foam core to create a good adhesion at a lower temperature [18, 19].
27
28
29 2.2 Thermoformability of foams
rR
30
31 The thermoformability of a foam is related to its crystallinity and ductility. Sorrento et al. [21]
32 thermoformed PET foam sheets (Tg =75 oC, Tm =255 oC) into 90o bends at different
ev
33
34 temperatures (130 -175 oC). Because the PET foam is completely crystallized, spring-back
35
angles as large as 30o were observed. The minimum temperature that yielded spring-back
36
iew
37 angles less than 5o was found to be 160oC, which is 85oC higher than the Tg of PET. PVC and
38
39 SAN foams are generally of high ductility (shear elongation at break is around 50% [78]). It
40 was reported [8] that PVC and SAN foam sheets can form a 10 mm thick 90o bend with an
41
42 inner radius of 10 mm even at a temperature of 50o C, indicating good thermoformability. Li
43
44
and Wei [22] found that PMI foam (Rohacell IG-f 51) is not able to form a U shape even at
45 180 oC due to its brittle nature. However, after being plasticized with water vapour, the PMI
46
47 foam core was successfully thermoformed into a U shape.
48
49 2.3 Processing conditions
50
51 The difficulty associated with thermoforming is that the processing conditions are dependent
52
53 on the material and the shape to be formed. Obtaining optimum processing conditions for a
54 specific material and shape requires a large number of experimental trials and errors [18].
55
56 Apart from forming temperature and pressure which are the most critical parameters, heating
57
58 8
59
1
2
3 time, insulation during transferring, forming rate, time of holding in the formed position and
4
5 the pressure application process have an impact on forming quality as well.
6
7 Foam sheets can be formed before thermal equilibrium is reached. In this way, the heating
8
time can be reduced. Rutledge et al. [8] tested the thermoformability of PVC and SAN foams
9
10 with different heat soak times (5 minutes, 30, 20, 10, 0 seconds) prior to forming at 120 oC
11
12 and 110 oC, respectively. It was found that 10 mm thick PVC and SAN foam sheets can form
13 a 90o bend with an inner radius of 10 mm even with 0 seconds of soak time, indicating that
14
15 cycle time can be significantly reduced. However, forming before thermal equilibrium is
16
17
reached in a foam might affect the properties of the resultant foam part. For example,
18 Rutledge et al. [8] found that 90o foam bends formed with 5 minutes soak time (thermal
19
Fo
20 equilibrium is reached in the foam sheets) show a more uniform density distribution across
21
the thickness of foam sheets at the corner compared to those formed with 0 seconds soak
22
23
rP
time. Sorrentino et al. [21] found that cell stretching starts to concentrate at the outer layer of
24
25 foam sheets as temperature gradients across the thickness of foam sheets increases. Density
26
ee
variation across the thickness of foam sheets and concentration of cell stretching would
27
28 reduce the strength of the foam sheets. Additionally, low temperature at the centre of foam
29
rR
30
sheets might result in residual stress and thus considerable spring-back [21]. Hence, a balance
31 between reducing heating time and retaining good mechanical properties of foams needs to be
32
stricken.
ev
33
34
35 Over the course of transferring, foam sheets cool, especially for the surface, reducing their
36
iew
37 formability. Therefore, forming foam sheets in the same environmental chamber where they
38 are heated is more effective than transferring them to another mould for forming. When
39
40 transferring is involved, foam sheets need to be insulated [23] (such as wrapping with silicone
41
42
films) or heated to a temperature higher than the required one, especially for the surfaces [19],
43 to compensate for the temperature drop during transferring. Coombs [7] suggested that
44
45 forming rate has no obvious effect on the spring-back of foam sheets. Breuer [19] stated when
46 foam cores are thermoformed together with thermoplastic composite skins, a high forming
47
48 rate might result in fabric wrinkling as insufficient time is left for the melted matrix to flow.
49
50 Low forming rates may also cause problems, as temperature drops and increases in the
51 viscosity of the melted matrix. Coombs [7] claimed holding samples in formed position at the
52
53 forming temperature for a few minutes could relieve internal stresses in the samples. But, no
54
further study was conducted to confirm the statement. During the process of thermoforming,
55
56 foam sheets are clamped at edges and stretched in-plane to conform to the mould, resulting in
57
58 9
59
1
2
3 thickness reduction of the foam sheets. Because foam sheets are normally not stretched evenly
4
5 during forming, reduction in thickness is also not uniform throughout the foam sheets. Breuer
6 et al. [19] found that hemispherical sandwich parts of relatively more uniform thickness can
7
8 be obtained by applying a vacuum in the mould cavity during thermoforming.
9
10 2.4 Microstructures and Mechanical properties of thermoformed foam
11
12 Akkerman and Pronk [24] manufactured truncated cones from extruded polystyrene foam
13
14 sheets using vacuum thermoforming. Using grid strain analysis and FE modelling of the
15 thermoforming process, they found the majority of the foam sheets experienced stretching
16
17 during thermoforming, and foam at corners underwent some shear and bending deformation.
18
19 The strain that foam experienced during forming will lead to microstructural change. For
Fo
20 instance, Sorrentino et al. [21] analysed the cell structure of thermoformed 90o foam bends. It
21
22 was found that foam cells at the inner side of the corner are compressed in the tangential
23
rP
direction, while cells at the outer side of the corner are stretched in the tangential direction, as
24
25 schematically shown in Figure 5. Because of this, density across the thickness of thermo-
26
ee
27 formed 90o foam bends at the corner is no longer uniform [8].

28
29
rR
30
31
32
ev
33
34
35
36
iew
(a) (b)
37
Figure 5: Schematic of cell morphology (a) before thermoforming and (b) after thermoforming.
38
39
40 It is well recognised that the properties of a foam are dependent on the properties of the
41 matrix, density and microstructures of the foam. Since foam microstructure changes during
42
43 thermoforming, its mechanical properties will change as well. However, very few studies
44
45
have been carried out to explore the mechanical property change of foams caused by
46 thermoforming. Layne et al. [79] conducted four-point bending tests with L-shaped sandwich
47
48 beams with thermoformed foam cores. It was found that the strength of the L-shaped
49 sandwich beams is only 1/3 of the theoretical value. But, they attributed the low strength of
50
51 the sandwich beam to poor bonding between the skins and core, without considering
52
53 reductions in foam mechanical properties caused by the process of thermoforming.
54
55 In a 3D sandwich structure with a thermoformed foam core, foam in the straight segments of
56
the sandwich structure has mainly experienced stretching during thermoforming [24] and is
57
58 10
59
1
2
3 primarily responsible for carrying transverse shear loads. Foam at the corners (or in curved
4
5 segments) of the sandwich structure has mainly experienced bending during thermoforming
6 [24] and is primarily responsible for bearing radial stress (through-thickness stress) [79-83].
7
8 As foam at the corners experienced concentrated strains during thermoforming, significant
9
change in mechanical properties might occur there. Additionally, foam at the corners is
10
11 usually subject to a higher level of stress than other regions in the sandwich structure.
12
13 Therefore, it is of great importance to characterise the mechanical properties of thermoformed
14 foam particularly at corners and to establish the relationship between property change and the
15
16 strain that foam experiences during thermoforming. However, these are very challenging
17
18
tasks, because after thermoforming foam is neither isotropic nor homogenous any more and
19 the strain that foam experienced during thermoforming might be complex.
Fo
20
21
22 3. In-mould foaming
23
rP
24
Foam cores of complex shape can be manufactured using in-mould foaming techniques as
25 well. In-mould foaming techniques are basically able to manufacture foam parts of any shapes.
26
ee
27 By fixing pre-formed skins to the surface of mould cavity prior to foaming, a foam-cored
28
sandwich structure can be produced in one single step with in-mould foaming. As the foam
29
rR
30 core is produced while fabricating the sandwich structure, this process is also termed in-situ
31
32 foaming. So far, there are three in-mould foaming techniques that hold potentials for mass
ev
33 production of foam cores of complex shape, namely injection moulding [27-51, 84], bead
34
35 foaming [52-63] and film foaming [64-69],. In this section, these techniques are discussed.
36
iew
37 3.1 Injection moulding

38
39 Foam injection moulding (FIM) is akin to the injection moulding of conventional plastics but
40
41 conducted with an addition of foaming agents. FIM features low cost, high dimensional
42
stability and relatively short cycle time. If a chemical foaming agent is utilized, it can be
43
44 added along with polymer pellets from the hopper. If a physical foaming agent is employed, a
45
46 specialised gas unit is attached to the injection moulding machine to inject the foaming agent
47 into the polymer melt. Gas-loaded melt is pushed forward by the rotation movement of a
48
49 screw and injected into a closed mould for foaming, as schematically shown in Figure 6a.
50
51
There are two types of foam injection moulding, namely, low-pressure FIM and high-pressure
52 FIM [27, 28].
53
54 In low-pressure FIM, the mould cavity is partially (nearly 55–95%) filled by a short shot of
55
56 gas-loaded polymer melt (see Figure 6b). Foam cells nucleate owing to the pressure drop at
57
58 11
59
1
2
3 the inlet (or gate) of the mould cavity during mould filling. Foaming occurs while the mould
4
5 is being filled. The void fraction (or porosity) of the foam produced is determined by the ratio
6 of the shot size to the volume of the mould cavity. It is referred to as low-pressure FIM
7
8 because the cavity pressure built up during the process remains relatively low (0.4-7 MPa in
9
[29]). On the contrary, in high-pressure FIM, the mould cavity is completely filled by a full
10
11 shot of gas-loaded polymer melt (see Figure 6c). As a result, the cavity pressure built up is
12
13 high, up to around 20 MPa [30, 33, 41, 85]. The high pressure makes the majority of cells that
14 have nucleated during the mould filling stage re-dissolve into the polymer melt. If the cavity
15
16 pressure is not high enough, an additional step of melt packing can be applied after the mould
17
18
filling in order to increase the cavity pressure [31, 34, 37, 39, 40]. The main cell nucleation
19 occurs during the solidification of the polymer melt and is triggered by the pressure drop
Fo
20
21 associated with the shrinkage of the melt [30-38].
22
23
rP
24
25
26
ee
27
28
29
rR
30
31 Injection of gas-load
32 melt
ev
33
34 (a)
35
36
iew
37
38
39
40 Low-
41 pressure
42 FIM
43
44 Partially filling the
45 mould Expansion Ejection of the
46 foamed part
47
48
(b)
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58 12
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 High-
9 pressure
10 FIM
11
12 Fully filling the
13 mould Foaming Ejection of the
14 foamed part
15
16 (c)
17
18
19
Fo
20 High-
21 pressure
22
FIM with
23
rP
moulding
24
25 opening
26 Fully filling the
ee
Mould Opening Ejection of the

27 mould
(Expansion) foamed part
28
29 (d)
rR
30
31 Figure 6: Schematics of (a) the configuration of foam injection moulding; (b) the process of low-pressure FIM;
(c) the process of high-pressure FIM; (d) the process of high-pressure FIM with mould opening.
32
ev
33
34 Low-pressure FIM can produce foams of high void fractions by limiting the size of shots. But,
35 foams produced in this method are characterised by poor cell morphologies, such as
36
iew
37 interconnected cells, highly distorted cells and nonhomogeneous cell size. This is because
38
39 mould-filling and foaming occur at the same time in low-pressure FIM [31]. In the beginning,
40 the mould cavity is empty. As the gas-loaded melt enters the mould cavity, the pressure at the
41
42 gate of the mould cavity increases over time and thus cell nucleation rate decreases [31].
43
Moreover, the nucleated bubbles grow as they travel towards the end of the cavity; therefore
44
45 bubbles nucleated at different times grow to different sizes [31]. Furthermore, the bubbles at
46
47 the end of the cavity are more likely to coalesce because they travelled a longer distance [31].
48 Hence, it is extremely difficult to produce a foam of uniform cell structure using low-pressure
49
50 FIM.
51
52 In contrast, high-pressure FIM can produce foams of very uniform cell structure because the
53
54 foaming step and the mould filling step are separated. The high cavity pressure forces the
55
majority of bubbles that have nucleated during the mould filling stage to dissolve back into
56
57
58 13
59
1
2
3 the melt [31]. The main bubble nucleation is driven by pressure drop associated with the
4
5 shrinkage of the polymer melt during the solidification stage. Hence, bubbles nucleate
6 relatively uniformly throughout the mould at nearly the same time and grow at a similar rate,
7
8 leading to a very uniform cell structure. However, the void fraction of the resultant foam is
9
restricted by the extent of shrinkage of the polymer melt [31, 33, 34, 37, 39, 41], usually less
10
11 than 15% [33, 41].
12
13
14
15
16
17 (a) (b)
18
19
Fo
20
21
22 (c) (d)
23
rP
24
25
26
ee
27 (e) (f)
28 Figure 7: Schematic of bubble nucleation and growth in high-pressure FIM process summarised by Shaayegan et
29 al.[31]: (a) bubble nucleation during the mould filling stage; (b) completely filled mould; (c) collapse and
rR
30 dissolution of the nucleated bubbles; (d) nucleated bubbles are dissolved back into the melt; (e) bubble
31 nucleation during the solidification stage due to the shrinkage of the melt; (f) bubble growth.
32
ev
33 In order to produce foams of fine cells and high void fractions, high-pressure FIM with mould
34
35 opening comes along [30, 31, 33-39, 41-45]. With this technique, the mould cavity opens
36
iew
after the mould is completely filled, providing more space for foam to expand (see Figure 6d).
37
38 Ideally, cell nucleation occurs upon the mould opening. The void fraction of the resultant
39
40 foam is largely dictated by the opening distance of the mould cavity. As opening distance
41 increases, the void fraction of foam increases, but, so does cell size and the dispersion of cell
42
43 size [44]. To address this issue, nano-particles [33, 41, 45, 46], nano-fibrils [42, 43] or chain
44
extenders [47] are usually added to enhance the melt strength of polymers and bubble
45
46 nucleation. For instance, Xie et al. [41] fabricated a polylactic acid (PLA) foam of a void
47
48 fraction of 50% and cell sizes ranging from 22 to 40 L by opening the mould cavity by 2
49 mm and adding 5 wt% nano-clay. Ameli et al. [33] manufactured a PLA foam with a void
50
51 fraction of 55% and relatively uniform cell structure (cell size M85L ; using high-pressure
52
53 FIM with mould opening and nano-clay/talc as a nucleating agent. Jinchuan et al. [38]
54 fabricated low-density (0.1-0.2 kg/m3) polypropylene (PP) foams using high-pressure FIM
55
56 with mould opening and polytetrafluoroethylene powder as a nucleating agent. Wang et al.
57
58 14
59
1
2
3 [43] produced a PP foam with a void fraction of 90% using high-pressure FIM with mould
4
5 opening and anofibres as a reinforcing agent. It was suggested that the addition of nanofibres
6 greatly enhanced the foam-ability of PP, leading to significant reduction in cell size.
7
8
The cell morphologies of injection moulded foam are governed by processing conditions such
9
10 as mould opening delay time [44], mould-opening speed [41], mould temperature [44, 85] and
11
12 packing pressure [30]. Xie et al. [41] found that the rate of mould opening has a significant
13 effect on foam cell structure, with slow mould opening resulting in small cells and smooth
14
15 surfaces. Spoerrer and Altstaedt [44] explored the effects of mould temperature and delay
16
17
time of mould opening on foam density and mechanical properties. It was found that
18 increasing mould temperature can reduce the thickness of unfoamed skin layers of foams
19
Fo
20 because an elevated mould temperature inhibits polymer melt near the surfaces of the mould
21
cavity from freezing. Increasing the delay time of mould opening increases the thickness of
22
23
rP
unfoamed skin layers of foams. Krause et al. [48] found PP foams of more homogenous cell
24
25 structures can be fabricated by attaching a low heat-conductive thermoplastic film to the
26
ee
surface of mould cavity. High packing pressure and long packing time lead to small cells [30].
27
28
29
Injection moulded foam parts show locally different characteristics of cell structures,
rR
30 especially across the thickness of the parts, because of temperature variation from mould wall
31
32 to the centre of mould cavity [27]. As mould wall is much colder than polymer melt, the
ev
33
polymer melt close to the mould wall is frozen and inhibited from foaming, leading to an
34
35 unfoamed skin layer. Injection moulded foam parts are characterised by unfoamed skin layers
36
iew
37 and a foamed core; therefore they are actually integral foams [27, 44, 86, 87]. Figure 8
38 schematically shows the cell morphology of an injection moulded foam. Along the thickness
39
40 direction, the foam can be divided into five regions based on the characteristics of cell
41
42
morphology, which are top skin layer, top outer foam core, inner foam core, bottom outer
43 foam core and bottom skin layer. Inner foam core has the largest cells owing to a slow cooling
44
45 rate. As mentioned above, the thickness of unfoamed skin layer is affected by mould
46 temperature, mould opening delay time and the addition of nucleating agents. Injection
47
48 moulded foams alone are efficient in carrying bending loads because they mimic sandwich
49
50 structures. However, they are not a premium core material for sandwich structures, because
51 the unfoamed skin layers are redundant and add extra weight to the sandwich structures.
52
53
54
55
56
57
58 15
59
1
2
3 Skin layer
4 Outer foam core
5
6
Inner foam core
7
8 Outer foam core
9
10 Skin layer
11
12 Figure 8: Schematic of cell morphology of foams fabricated using foam injection moulding.
13
14
15 3.2 Bead foaming
16
17
Bead foaming is a process to manufacture foam parts by welding numerous foamed beads
18 together [52]. There are two forms of foam beads, namely, expanded and expandable beads.
19
Fo
20 Expandable beads are polymer granules impregnated with blowing agents, which need to be
21 pre-foamed with heat treatment before the welding process. Since not expanded, expandable
22
23
rP
beads are easy to be transported. Currently, three expanded/expandable beads are commonly
24
25 used, namely, expandable polystyrene (EPS), expanded polyethene (EPE) and expanded
26 polypropylene (EPP). EPS is the oldest bead foam product, invented in 1949, followed by
ee
27
28 EPE and EPP invented in the 1970s and early 1980s, respectively. Because not every polymer
29
rR
is suitable for bead foaming, a substantial body of research has been carried out to modify
30
31 these less suitable polymers in order to make them suitable for bead foaming. So far, foam
32
beads based on other polymers have been developed, such as PLA foam beads [53, 54, 88],
ev
33
34 thermoplastic polyurethane foam beads [55], polybutylene terephthalate foam beads [56],
35
36
iew
PET foam beads [57], PEI [58] and even PMI foam beads [59-63].
37
38 Generally, bead foamed parts show mechanical, thermal and acoustic properties similar to
39
40 extruded foams of the same density [52]. The main advantages that bead foaming offers are
41
its ability to produce foams of both complex shape and low densities (densities down to 30
42
43 kg/m3) [52]. Therefore, bead foaming has been widely used to manufacture packaging foams
44
45 and automotive interiors. Moreover, foam parts with pre-defined density gradients, such as
46 high density at high stressed areas and low density at low stressed areas, are also possible to
47
48 manufacture by using beads of different densities [89]. Lastly, inserts (such as connecting
49
50 elements) can be integrated into foam parts during the process of foaming.
51
52 3.2.1 Process of bead foaming
53
54 Foamed beads are welded together using hot steam in a steam chest moulding machine.
55
Details regarding the steam chest moulding process are described in the review of Raps et al.
56
57
58 16
59
1
2
3 [52]. Figure 9 schematically shows the main steps of this process. Firstly, a mould that defines
4
5 the geometry of the final part is closed. Secondly, the mould is filled with expanded beads
6 using a special injector, and the beads are compacted using a static pressure (approximately
7
8 0.15-4 MPa) to ensure a complete filling. Thirdly, the mould cavity is ventilated with hot
9
steam, which melts the surface of the beads and makes them fuse via inter-diffusion of
10
11 polymer chains between neighbouring beads. Fourthly, cold water is sprayed to cool down the
12
13 mould using a cooling system inside the tool. Finally, the mould is opened, and the foam part
14 is ejected.
15
16
17
The steaming process itself contains three sub-steps (as shown in Figure 9c). In the first step,
18 hot steam flows parallel to the mould with all the valves open, and the mould is pre-heated by
19
Fo
20 purging out the air between the beads. In the second step, hot steam runs across the mould
21
(referred to as cross-steaming) by keeping the steam inlet and outlet valves opposite to each
22
23
rP
other open (i.e., keeping the left inlet valves and right outlet valves open). To ensure a
24
25 homogenous distribution of temperature throughout the mould, the mould is steamed by
26
ee
opening the valves at both sides of the mould alternatingly. In the third step, steam is pumped
27
28 into the steam chamber while all the outlet valves are closed, which is termed autoclave
29
rR
30
steaming. This step is carried out to improve the surface quality of the final part by creating a
31 skin.
32
ev
33
34 Closing Filling
35
36
iew
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49 (a) (b)
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58 17
59
1
2
3 3.1 Purging 3.2 Cross-
4 steaming
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 3.3 Autoclave
Fo
20 -steaming
21
22
23
rP
24
25
26
ee
27
28
29
rR
30
31
32
ev
33
34 (c)
35 Ejecting
Cooling
36
iew
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50 (d) (e)
51 Figure 9: Schematic of steam chest moulding: (a) mould closing; (b) beads filling; (a) steaming; (d) cooling; (d)
52 ejecting.
53
54 The degree of fusion has a significant influence on the mechanical properties of the final foam
55
56 parts [90-92]. Rossacci and Shivkumar [91, 92] found that foam fracture takes place between
57
58 18
59
1
2
3 beads (as schematically shown in Figure 10a) at low degrees of fusion and occurs across the
4
5 beads (also referred to as trans-bead fracture, as schematically shown in Figure 10b) at high
6 degrees of fusion. As the degree of fusion increases, the elastic modulus, strength and
7
8 ductility of the final foam parts increase. The degree of fusion decreases with increasing foam
9
density and polymer molecular weight. In a large foam part, the degree of fusion may vary
10
11 considerably from place to place due to the non-uniform distribution of temperature in the
12
13 process of moulding. In thick sections, the degree of fusion may decrease from the surface
14 towards the centre. The region that was filled last during moulding may have a degree of
15
16 fusion lower than other regions.
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP
24
25
26
ee
27
28
29
rR
30
31 (a) (b)
32 Figure 10: Schematic of (a) between-bead fracture and (b) trans-bead fracture.
ev
33
34 To achieve a high degree of fusion between foam beads, high steam pressure and temperature,
35
36 and sufficient steaming time are required [52, 93]. As steam comes into the mould cavity
iew
37 through small nozzles, steam pressure and temperature begin to decline owing to the
38
39 condensation of the steam on the beads and the resistance of flowing through the beads. This
40
41 leads to lower temperature and pressure at the centre of the mould cavity. Considering the
42 processing of Neopolen EPP [94] as an example, steam pressure at the inlet is above 7 - 8 bar
43
44 but drops to 2.5-4 bar in the centre of the mould [94]. High steam pressure is usually utilized
45
to ensure that the beads in the centre of the mould are adequately heated. Introducing dry hot
46
47 air into the steam could also improve heat conduction at the centre of the mould and thus
48
49 improve the mechanical properties of the moulded part [95]. However, it should be noted that
50 high steam pressure means high operating cost and high steam temperature may melt foam
51
52 beads, especially those near the steam nozzles. In general, optimum processing conditions for
53
54 a specific bead foam product are obtained by trials and errors [52].
55
56 3.2.2 Production of sandwich structures with bead foams
57
58 19
59
1
2
3 A sandwich structure with bead foam as a core can be manufactured in one step [96]. Firstly,
4
5 pre-formed skins are fixed on the surfaces of the mould cavity. Secondly, foam beads are
6 filled in between the skins. As steam nozzles on the mould are covered by the skins, steam
7
8 cannot run through the thickness direction of the sandwich structure but have to flow through
9
the mould from the sides that are not covered by the skins, as shown in Figure 11. This means
10
11 steam has to travel a longer distance.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP
24
25
26
ee
27
28
29
rR
30
31 Figure 11: Schematic of steam flow in the production of sandwich structures with bead foam.
32
ev
33
3.2.3 High-performance foam beads
34
35 Compared to high-performance foam cores, conventional bead foams (EPS and EPE foams)
36
iew
37 have poor mechanical properties [55, 58, 95, 97, 98], and are therefore not well-suited for the
38
39 application of sandwich cores. PET foams were commercialised in the 1990s and have been
40 used as cores of sandwich structures due to their high mechanical properties, high-
41
42 temperature resistance and recyclability. PET foams are mostly produced by extrusion
43
foaming with densities ranging from 30 to 400 kg/m3. PET bead foams have been
44
45 commercially available in recent years, such as Armashape [57] from Armacell. However, the
46
47 mechanical properties of PET bead foams are not satisfactory to date. For example,
48 Armashape 90 (with a density of 90 kg/m3) has a compressive modulus of only 7 MPa and
49
50 compressive strength of 0.45 MPa. These properties are much lower than those of its extruded
51
52 counterpart (such as ArmaForm Core GR80 [99])
53
54 PEI foams are high-performance foams widely used in the aviation industry due to their high
55
mechanical properties, high-temperature resistance, good anti fire properties and excellent
56
57
58 20
59
1
2
3 dielectric properties [100, 101]. PEI foams are mostly produced by batch foaming with
4
5 densities ranging from 50 to 110 kg/m3. Feng et al. [58] developed a microcellular PEI bead
6 foam that shows good mechanical properties, with a compression strength of 6.87 MPa and
7
8 compressive modulus of 105 MPa at a density of 180 kg/m3. However, the PET bead foam
9
was moulded in a high-pressure vessel (8-12 MPa) and foaming was induced by rapid
10
11 pressure drop (5 MPa/s). Hence, this process is not transferable to high-volume production.
12
13 Rohacell Triple F is a PMI-based bead foam recently developed by the German company
14
15 Evonik [59-63]. Unlike other bead foams, Rohacell Triple F are welded by radiation (at 180-
16
17
250oC) instead of circulating hot steam. It offers densities in the range of 75 to 200 kg/m³.
18 Similar to other bead foams, Rohacell Triple F also has mechanical properties lower than its
19
Fo
20 batch foamed counterpart (for instance, Rohacell IG-F, as shown in Figure 12) due to weak
21
bonds and voids between foam beads. To improve bonds between foam beads, adhesives can
22
23
rP
be added in between foam beads in the process of moulding [63]. The compressive strength of
24
25 Rohacell Triple F with the addition of additives is shown in Figure 12. It is notable that the
26
ee
additives significantly increases the compressive strength of Rohacell Triple F. Due to their
27
28 high mechanical properties, temperature resistance and creep resistance, moulded Rohacell
29
rR
30
Triple F foam parts are well-suited for further processing of sandwich structures, such as wet
31 pressing or HP-RTM. This makes Rohacell Triple F an attractive candidate for the mass
32
production of sandwich panels in the automotive industry.
ev
33
34
35 5.0 ROHACELL Triple F
Compressive strength (MPa)
36
iew
4.5
37 4.0
ROHACELL Triple F+Adhesive
38 ROHACELL IG-F
3.5
39
40 3.0
41 2.5
42 2.0
43 1.5
44 1.0
45
46
0.5
47 0.0
48 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210
49 Density (kg/m3)
50
51 Figure 12: Compressive strength vs. density for ROHACELL Triple F, ROHACELL Triple F with adhesive and
ROHACELL IG-F [63].
52
53 3.3 Film foaming
54
55
56
57
58 21
59
1
2
3 Foamable films are polymer films impregnated with blowing agents, which can foam upon a
4
5 sudden decrease of pressure at a high temperature. Foamable films were initially developed at
6 Delft University of Technology [64] and Schreiner Luchtvaart Groep B.V [65, 66] with PEI.
7
8 Methylene chloride (MC) was initially chosen as the blowing agent for PEI foamable films.
9
However, due to its high toxicity, acetone was recommended as an alternative blowing agent
10
11 by Provo Kluit [67]. Many methods have been developed to produce foamable films [67],
12
13 such as vapour impregnation, solvent casting, film adhesion and impregnation by solution
14 casting, and swelling. So far, foamable films are primarily made from PEI and PP. The
15
16 company FITS Technology (Driebergen, Netherlands) [68] currently delivers sandwich panels
17
18
made from PEI and PP foamable films. Sandwich structures can be manufactured in one step
19 using in-situ foaming of foamable films.
Fo
20
21
22 3.3.1 Process of film foaming
23
rP
In the process of film foaming, foamable films are stacked and placed between two skins.
24
25 An envelope is utilized to prevent the material from being squeezed out from the sides
26
ee
27 [67]. The whole package is then placed in a pre-heated press (as shown in Figure 13a). The
28 press is subsequently closed quickly, and the package is compacted (as shown in Figure
29
rR
30 13b). After a short period of heating, the press is slowly opened, allowing the blowing
31
32
agent in the films to boil and foam to expand (as shown in Figure 13c). When the press is
ev
33 opened to the desired distance, the press plates are held in position and cooled down to
34
35 room temperature. Finally, the press is opened, and the sandwich panel is removed. Figure
36
iew
14 schematically shows an in-situ film foamed sandwich panel. The number of foamable
37
38 films required can be calculated by the height and density of the sandwich panel, provided
39
40 that the blowing agent percentage is known.
41
42 V0
43
F
44
45
46
47
48
49
50 Tf Tf
51
52
53 (a) (b)
54
55
56
57
58 22
59
1
2
3 V0
4 Vf
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Tf T0
12
13
14
15
(c) (d)
Figure 13: Schematic of film foaming: (a) mould closing; (b) heating and pressing; (b) press opening and
16 foaming; (c) cooling and ejection.
17
18
19
Fo
20
Skin
21
22
Foamed
23
rP
24
25
26
ee
27
28
29
rR
30
31
32
Skin
ev
33
34
35 Foamable film
36
iew
37
Figure 14: Schematic of partly in-suit foamed sandwich panel.
38
39 3.3.2 Processing parameters
40
41 In the process of film foaming, the initial temperature of the press is one of the most
42
43 critical parameters. It must be set to a value at which the impregnated polymer has a
44 sufficiently low viscosity to allow bubbles to nucleate and grow, but high enough to
45
46 prevent the polymer from flowing out of the press [67]. The pressure applied to foamable
47
48 films must be high enough to keep the blowing agent from boiling during the heating step.
49 High pressure is also beneficial for bubble nucleation and thus for the homogeneity of the
50
51 foam produced. However, pressures higher than a specific value might cause the materials
52
to be squeezed out of the press.
53
54
55 Heating time must be long enough to achieve a homogeneous distribution of temperature
56
57
58 23
59
1
2
3 in the materials. Extended heating time yields stronger bonds if the foam core and the skins
4
5 are fusion-bonded. Additionally, extended heating time improves the homogeneity of
6 distribution of the blowing agent in the films, therefore leading to a foam of more
7
8 homogenous cells [67]. However, blowing agents might escape from the lateral sides of
9
sandwich panels if the materials are heated too long, which deteriorates the quality of the
10
11 foam produced.
12
13 To achieve a good bond between the foam and the skins, there must be some counter-
14
15 pressure applied to the skins during foaming. Hence, the press should not be opened too
16
17
fast. However, bubbles would have more time to coalesce if the press is opened too slow,
18 leaving foam with coarser microstructures. It also should be noted that opening speed is
19
Fo
20 dependent on the thickness of the final sandwich panel. Thicker sandwich panels require a
21
higher opening speed [67].
22
23
rP
24 Cooling rates have little effect on the quality of the final sandwich panel if MC is used as a
25 blowing agent. However, when acetone is used, high cooling rates would cause poor
26
ee
27 adhesion between the skins and the foam core [67]. Depending on the percentage of
28
29
blowing agents, processing parameters used for MC impregnated PEI film are listed in
rR
30 Table 1.
31
32
Table 1: Processing parameters used for MC impregnated PEI film [67].
ev
33
34 Values
35 MC weight percentage 28.0 %
36
iew
Processing temperature 155±2.5 oC

37 Initial pressure 4 MPa
38
Heating time 120 s
39
40 Press opening rate 0.3 mm/s
41 Final height 13.6 mm
Cooling rate o
1-10 C/s, depending on set-up
42
43
3.3.3 Microstructures and mechanical properties
44
45 In terms of microstructures, foams made from PEI foamable films have two distinctive
46
47 features. One is that cells are elongated in the rise direction. The other feature is that cells
48
49
near the skins are smaller than those at the centre of the foams, as schematically shown in
50 Figure 15a. The anisotropy of cell shape (elongated in the rise direction) causes the
51
52 anisotropy in foam mechanical properties [102], leading to a foam with enhanced
53 mechanical properties in the elongation direction and weakened mechanical properties in
54
55 the other directions. As foam cells are always elongated in the rise direction, in curved
56
57
58 24
59
1
2
3 sandwich panels or non-horizontal sections of sandwich panels foam cells do not align
4
5 perpendicular to the skins, as schematically shown in Figure 15b, which will compromise
6 the mechanical properties of the sandwich panels.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15 (a) (b)
16
Figure 15: Schematics of microstructures of foam made from PEI foamable films: (a) flat sandwich panel; (b)
17
curved sandwich panel.
18
19
The compressive and shear properties of foam made from PEI foamable films with
Fo
20
21 densities of 80, 90 and 110 kg/m3 are compared with other commercial high-performance
22
23 foams of the same densities in Table 2. Airex R82 is a PEI foam, and Divinycell HP80 is a
rP
24
PVC foam. The compressive properties of foam made from PEI foamable films are much
25
26 higher than those of Airex R82 and slightly higher than those of Divinycell HP80, due to
ee
27
28 the elongation of cells in the rise direction. The shear properties of the foam are lower than
29 those of Airex R82 and Divinycell HP80 at a density of 80 kg/m3. For the density of 110
rR
30
31 kg/m3, the foam made from PEI foamable film has shear properties close to Airex R82.
32
ev
33 Table 2: Comparison of mechanical properties between PEI film foam, Airex R82 and Divinycell
34 HP80.
35
36 Compressive Shear Shear
iew
Density Compressive
37 Materials strength modulus strength
(kg/m3) modulus(MPa)
38 (MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
39 PEI film foam [68] 80 110 1.8 12 0.8
40 PEI film foam [68] 90 130 2.5 19 1.2
41 PEI film foam [68] 110 160 3.5 26 1.5
42 Airex R82.80 [100] 80 62 1.1 23 1.1
43
Airex R82.110 [100] 110 83 1.4 30 1.4
44
45
Divinycell HP80 [103] 80 105 1.5 28 1.25
46 3.3.4 Manufacture of thermoplastic 3D sandwich structures
47
48 A uniformly distributed pressure needs to be applied onto the foamable films during the
49
50 heating stage in order to produce a foam of homogenous density. This makes manufacturing
51 of 3D sandwich panels using in-situ film foaming is a challenging task [67], especially for
52
53 sandwich panels with varying thickness. To apply pressure to foamable films, a metal mould
54
combined with hydraulic pressure was proposed by Provo Kluit [67] to manufacture 3D
55
56 sandwich panels, which is schematically shown in Figure 16. The top mould is filled with a
57
58 25
59
1
2
3 bag of oil. During the process of manufacturing, the press plates and oil are heated. Foamable
4
5 films sandwiched between two thermoformable skins are placed in the press (as shown in
6 Figure 16a). Hydraulic pressure is immediately applied onto the foamable films via the oil
7
8 once the press is closed (as shown in Figure 16b). After a period of heating, the oil pressure is
9
reduced, triggering the foaming of the foamable films. As the foam expands, the oil is pushed
10
11 out of the mould. When the mould is fully occupied by foam (as shown in Figure 16c), the
12
13 press plates and oil begin to cool. After cooling, the press is opened and the sandwich part is
14 removed (as shown in Figure 16d).
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22 Oil Foamable films and skins
23
rP
24
25
26
ee
27
28
29
rR
30 (a) mould closing (b) heating

31
32
ev
33
34
35
36
iew
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45 (c) foaming (d) ejecting
46 Figure 16: Manufacturing three-dimensional sandwich panels with foamable films using a mould combined with
47 hydraulic pressure:(a) mould closing; (b) heating;(c)foaming;(d) ejecting.
48
49 Another approach to fabricate 3D sandwich parts using in-situ film foaming was devised by
50
51 Chikugo et al. [69], in which a sandwich panel is foamed to nearly half of the final thickness
52
between two vertical flat press plates and then rapidly transferred into a mould for the
53
54 remaining foaming. The reason that it is difficult to manufacture 3D sandwich parts with
55
56 foamable films is the foaming of these films is triggered by the pressure drop. Thermally
57
58 26
59
1
2
3 foamable sheets patented by Mitsuoka et al. [104-106] can foam when heated to a certain
4
5 temperature. Ideally, with these thermally foamable sheets, foams or sandwich structures of
6 complex geometry can be produced with more ease. However, studies on thermally foamable
7
8 sheets have not been reported in the literature.
9
10 4. Conclusions
11
12 In this work, thermoforming, injection moulding, bead foaming and film foaming are
13
14 reviewed in order to explore viable processes to manufacture foam cores of complex
15
geometry for automotive applications. All the processing methods can produce foam cores of
16
17 complex 3D geometry with high efficiency and low cost. However, each of them has its own
18
19 advantages and disadvantages.
Fo
20
21 The majority of commercial high-performance foam cores such as PVC, PMI, SAN, PEI, PET,
22
23
PES foams can be thermoformed. As these high-performance foam cores have great
rP
24 mechanical properties, theoretically, foam cores manufactured by thermoforming of them

25
26 would have high mechanical properties as well. However, during the process of
ee
27
thermoforming foam cells are stretched or compressed, which would reduce the mechanical
28
29 properties of the foam to some degree. So far, the extent of reduction in mechanical properties
rR
30
31 of foams caused by thermoforming is unknown, and there is limited research on the
32 characterisation of mechanical properties of thermoformed foam cores. In comparison to other
ev
33
34 techniques, the processing temperature and pressure for thermoforming are relatively low.
35
36
iew
Injection moulded foams generally have high density, which lies outside the density range
37
38 required for the automotive industry. Additionally, injection moulded foams show locally
39 different characteristics of cell structures across the thickness of foam sheets and thus have
40
41 poor mechanical properties. Furthermore, an unfoamed skin layer is inevitably created on the
42
43 surface of injection moulded foams, which adds extra weight to sandwich structures.
44
45 Bead foaming offers a high level of freedom in foam geometry to be moulded. Inserts can be
46
47
integrated into foam cores during the process of foaming. Foam cores with high density in
48 high stressed areas and low density in low stressed areas can be manufactured with foam
49
50 beads of different densities. However, due to poor bonding and voids between foam beads,
51 bead foams generally have mechanical properties lower than those of their batch foamed
52
53 counterparts. Conventional bead foams such as EPS, EPE and EPP have poor mechanical
54
55 properties. A PMI-based bead foam recently developed by Evonik seems to have promising
56 mechanical properties.
57
58 27
59
1
2
3 Ideally, film foaming has the same advantages as bead foaming. However, the foaming of
4
5 currently available foamable films is pressure-induced, which makes it difficult to
6 manufacture foam cores of complex 3D geometry. Thermally foamable films can foam when
7
8 heated to a certain temperature. Theoretically, foam cores of complex 3D geometry can be
9
readily manufactured with thermally foamable films. However, thermally foamable films are
10
11 not commercially available yet. Additionally, foams made from foamable films have cells
12
13 elongated in the rise direction. This would lead to poor mechanical properties for curved
14 sandwich panels.
15
16
17
In summary, thermoforming with high-performance foam sheets and moulding with high-
18 performance foam beads (such as PMI foam beads) so far seem to hold great potentials for
19
Fo
20 mass production of sandwich structures of complex geometry in the automotive industry.
21
However, there is a general lack of investigations on the mechanical properties of
22
23
rP
thermoformed foams and high-performance bead foams. Hence, further research is still
24
25 required to assess the suitability of foam thermoforming and bead foaming for manufacturing
26
ee
sandwich structures of complex geometry for automotive applications.

27
28
29 5. Acknowledgement
rR
30
31 The authors would like to thank for the financial support from the 111 Project (B17034),
32 China, the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (WUT: 2019III069GX).
ev
33
34 They are also grateful to Prof. Simon Bickerton and Prof. Mark Battley (University of
35
36
Auckland, New Zealand) for fruitful discussions.
iew
37
38 6. References
39
1. Zenkert D. Handbook of Sandwich Construction. Engineering Materials Advisory Services Ltd,
40
1997.
41
2. Weber J. The Role of Curvature and Structural Compliance on Water Impact Loading of
42
Composite Structures. PhD thesis, The University of Auckland, New Zealand, 2016.
43
3. Weber J, Das R and Battley M. Effects of curvature on slamming loads. 35th International
44
Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering. Busan, South Korea2016.
45
4. Seibert HF. Applications for PMI foams in aerospace sandwich structures. Reinforced Plastics
46
2006; 50: 44-48.
47
5. Cavatorta MP and Duella R. Material characterization of a composite–foam sandwich for the front
48
structure of a high speed train. Composite Structures 2003; 61: 13-25.
49
6. Wang C, Zhang XM and Tang CY. Manufacturing Process of Large Scale Sandwich Structure
50
with Variable Thickness of PMI Foam Core. Advanced Materials Research 2011; 299-300: 816-819.
51 7. Coombs B. Manufacturing of Sustainable Composite Structures for Aircraft Interiors. Master
52 Thesis, The University of Auckland, New Zealand, 2012.
53 8. Rutledge T, Moody J, Bickerton S, et al. Thermoforming of polymeric foam cores for automotive
54 application of curved sandwich panel composites. Report no. ME65-2016, 2016. New Zealand: The
55 University of Auckland.
56 9. Toray. Aluminum Flex-Core Datasheet, https://www.toraytac.com (2019).
57
58 28
59
1
2
3 10. Moritz P, Lars M and Roman G. Innovative processing methods with thermoplastic PET-foam.
4 15th International Conference on Composite Structures. Porto, Portugal,2009.
5 11. Fathi A, Wolff-Fabris F, Altstadt V, et al. An investigation on the flexural properties of balsa and
6 polymer foam core sandwich structures: Influence of core type and contour finishing options. Journal
7 of Sandwich Structures & Materials 2013; 15: 487-508.
8 12. Haddad M, Guillaumat L, Terekhina S, et al. Analytical and numerical study based on
9 experimental investigation of different curved sandwich composites manufactured by filament
10 winding process. Journal of Composite Materials 2018; 52: 891-917.
11 13. Yu S, Qiang L, Feng H, et al. Study on process and mechanical properties of the vari forming
12 foam-core sandwich composite by different handing methods. Fiber Rnforced Plastics/Composites
13 2017; 9: 89-92.
14 14. Hai F, Weiqing L, Weidong LU, et al. Flexural properties of grooved perforation sandwich
15 composites. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology: Materials Science 2010; 4: 583-587.
16 15. Yokozeki T and Iwamoto K. Effects of core machining configuration on the debonding toughness
17 of foam core sandwich panels. Advanced Composite Materials 2014; 25: 45-58.
18 16. Yurddaskal M and Baba BO. The effect of curvature on the impact response of foam-based
19 sandwich composite panels. Steel & Composite Structures 2016; 20: 983-997.
Fo
20 17. Kappel and Erik. Spring-in of curved CFRP/foam-core sandwich structures. Composite Structures
21 2015; 128: 155-164.
22 18. Rozant O, Bourban PE, Manson JAE, et al. Pre-heating of thermoplastic sandwich materials for
23 rapid thermoforming. Journal of Thermoplastic Composite Materials 2000; 13: 510-523.
rP
24 19. Breuer U, Ostgathe M and Neitzel M. Manufacturing of all-thermoplastic sandwich systems by a

25 one-step forming technique. Polymer Composites 1998; 19: 275-279.
26 20. Rozant O, Bourban PE and Manson JAE. Manufacturing of three dimensional sandwich parts by
ee
27 direct thermoforming. Composites - Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing 2001; 32: 1593-1601.
28 21. Sorrentino L, Aurilia M and Iannace S. Effects of thermoforming on the cell morphology of a
29 thermoplastic core. 17th International Conferences on Composite Materials. Edinburgh, UK2009.
rR
30 22. Li C and Wei C. Research on U-foam Core Material in Heat Forming Process. Hi-Tech Fiber &
31 Application 2009; 34: 30-34.
32 23. Smith G. Manufacturing and Material Developments for Aircraft Interior Sandwich Composite.
Master Thesis, University of Auckland, New Zealand, 2009.
ev
33
34 24. Akkerman R and Pronk R. Vacuum forming of thermoplastic foam. Polymer Engineering and
35 Science 1999; 39: 2064-2074.
36 25. Åkermo M and Astrom T. Modeling compression molding of all thermoplastic honeycomb core
iew
37 sandwich components. Part B: Model verification. Polymer Composites 2000; 21: 257-267.
38 26. Chen S, Mcgregor OPL, Endruweit A, et al. Simulation of the forming process for curved
39 composite sandwich panels. International Journal of Material Forming 2019; 2: 1588-1600.
40 27. Altan M. Thermoplastic Foams: Processing, Manufacturing, and Characterization. Recent
41 Research in Polymerization. IntechOpen, 2018.
42 28. Ries S, Spoerrer A and Altstaedt V. Foam injection molding of thermoplastic elastomers: Blowing
43 agents, foaming process and characterization of structural foams. 29th International Conference of the
44 Polymer-Processing-Society. Nuremberg, Germany2013.
45 29. Lee JWS, Wang J, Yoon JD, et al. Strategies to Achieve a Uniform Cell Structure with a High
46 Void Fraction in Advanced Structural Foam Molding. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
47 2008; 47: 9457-9464.
48 30. Tromm M, Shaayegan V, Wang C, et al. Investigation of the mold-filling phenomenon in high-
49 pressure foam injection molding and its effects on the cellular structure in expanded foams. Polymer
50 2019; 160: 43-52.
51 31. Shaayegan V, Wang G and Park CB. Study of the bubble nucleation and growth mechanisms in
52 high-pressure foam injection molding through in-situ visualization. European Polymer Journal 2016;
53 76: 2-13.
54 32. Nofar M and Park CB. Poly (lactic acid) foaming. Progress in Polymer Science 2014; 39: 1721-
55 1741.
56
33. Ameli A, Jahani D, Nofar M, et al. Processing and characterization of solid and foamed injection-
molded polylactide with talc. Journal of Cellular Plastics 2013; 49: 351-374.
57
58 29
59
1
2
3 34. Shaayegan V, Wang G and Park CB. Effect of foam processing parameters on bubble nucleation
4 and growth dynamics in high-pressure foam injection molding. Chemical Engineering Science 2016;
5 155: 27-37.
6 35. Lee RE, Azdast T, Wang G, et al. Highly expanded fine-cell foam of
7 polylactide/polyhydroxyalkanoate/nano-fibrillated polytetrafluoroethylene composites blown with
8 mold-opening injection molding. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 2020; 155: 286-
9 292.
10 36. Jin F-L, Zhao M, Park M, et al. Recent Trends of Foaming in Polymer Processing: A Review.
11 Polymers 2019; 11: 953.
12 37. Shaayegan V, Wang C, Costa F, et al. Effect of the melt compressibility and the pressure drop rate
13 on the cell-nucleation behavior in foam injection molding with mold opening. European Polymer
14 Journal 2017; 92: 314-325.
15 38. Jinchuan Z, Guilong W, Zhao Q, et al. Development of high thermal insuation polypropylene
16 foams blown in injection molding with mold opening. Society of Plastics Engineers Annual Technical
17 Conference. Los Angeles, United States,2017.
18 39. Shaayegan V, Ameli A, Wang S, et al. Experimental observation and modeling of fiber rotation
19 and translation during foam injection molding of polymer composites. Composites Part A: Applied
Fo
20 Science and Manufacturing 2016; 88: 67-74.
21 40. Wu H, Zhao G, Wang G, et al. A new core-back foam injection molding method with chemical
22 blowing agents. Materials & design 2018; 144: 331-342.
23 41. Pengcheng X, Gaojian W, Zhida C, et al. Effect of Mold Opening Process on Microporous
rP
24 Structure and Properties of Microcellular Polylactide–Polylactide Nanocomposites. Polymers 2018;

25 10: 554.
26 42. Zhao J, Zhao Q, Wang L, et al. Development of high thermal insulation and compressive strength
ee
27 BPP foams using mold-opening foam injection molding with in-situ fibrillated PTFE fibers. European
28 Polymer Journal 2018; 98: 1-10.
29 43. Wang L, Hikima Y, Ohshima M, et al. Development of a Simplified Foam Injection Molding
rR
30 Technique and Its Application to the Production of High Void Fraction Polypropylene Foams.
31 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2017; 56: 13734-13742.
32 44. Sporrer ANJ and Altstadt V. Controlling Morphology of Injection Molded Structural Foams by
Mold Design and Processing Parameters. Journal of Cellular Plastics 2007; 43: 313-330.
ev
33
34 45. Wei G, Chun Z, Jie YU, et al. Injection processing and foaming behaviors of polypropylene
35 composite foams. Wuhan University Journal of Natural science 2014; 19: 123-128.
36 46. Wong S, Lee JWS, Naguib HE, et al. Effect of Processing Parameters on the Mechanical
iew
37 Properties of Injection Molded Thermoplastic Polyolefin (TPO) Cellular Foams. Macromolecular

38 Materials & Engineering 2008; 293: 605-613.
39 47. Pilla S, Kramschuster A, Yang L, et al. Microcellular injection-molding of polylactide with chain-
40 extender. Materials Science & Engineering: C 2009; 29: 1258-1265.
41
48. Krause K, Neumeyer T, Baumgart C, et al. Influence of low heat conductive inserts on
morphology of foam injection molded parts. In: 34th International Conference of the Polymer-
42
Processing-Society (PPS) Montreal, Canada, 2019.
43
49. Roch A, Huber T, Henning F, et al. LFT foam - Lightweight potential for semi-structural
44
components through the use of long-glass-fiber-reinforced thermoplastic foams. In: 29th International
45
Conference of the Polymer-Processing-Society (PPS) Nuremberg, Germany, 2013.
46
50. Kasemphaibulsuk P, Holzner M, Kuboki T, et al. Foam injection molding of glass fiber reinforced
47
polypropylene composites with laminate skins. Polymer Composites 2017; 39: 4323-4332.
48
51. Menrath A, Henning F, Huber T, et al. Foam-injected sandwich panels with continuous-reinforced
49
facings. 29th International Conference of the Polymer-processing-society. Nuremberg, Germany2013.
50
52. Raps D, Hossieny N, Park CB, et al. Past and present developments in polymer bead foams and
51
bead foaming technology. Polymer 2015; 56: 5-19.
52
53. Parker K, Garancher JP, Shah S, et al. Expanded polylactic acid - An eco-friendly alternative to
53
polystyrene foam. Journal of Cellular Plastics 2011; 47: 233-243.
54
54. Nofar M, Ameli A and Park CB. A novel technology to manufacture biodegradable polylactide
55
bead foam products. Materials and Design 2015; 83: 413-421.
56
57
58 30
59
1
2
3 55. Ge C, Ren Q, Wang S, et al. Steam-chest molding of expanded thermoplastic polyurethane bead
4 foams and their mechanical properties. Chemical Engineering Science 2017; 174: 337-346.
5 56. Köppl, Raps and Altstädt. E-PBT—Bead foaming of poly(butylene terephthalate) by underwater
6 pelletizing. Journal of Cellular Plastics 2014; 50: 475-487.
7 57. Armacell. Technical Data ArmaShape, www.armacell-core-foams.com (2020).
8 58. Feng D, Li L and Wang Q. Fabrication of three-dimensional polyetherimide bead foams via
9 supercritical CO 2 /ethanol co-foaming technology. RSC Advances 2019; 9: 4072-4081.
10 59. Evonik. Technical Information ROHACELL® Triple F, https://www.rohacell.com (2015).
11 60. Werner S and Axel Z. In-Mold Foamed Cores for Lightweight Design. Kunststoffe International
12 2015; 10: 110-112.
13 61. I., Liebl, K., et al. Rohacell Triple F: Innovative high temperature foam for sandwich components.
14 Polyurethanes Magazine International Pu Magazine 2017; 14: 199-203.
15 62. Tufano F and Roth MA. Complex shaped PMI Foam Cores for highly efficient FRP Composite
16 Sandwich Fabrication for low to high volume applications. SAMPE Brazil Conference 2015. Sao Jose
17 dos Campos, Brazil2015.
18 63. Yin J and Hu P. ROHACELL PMI Rigid Foam and Mold Foaming Technology. Aeronautical
19 Manufacturing Technology 2014; 15: 128-129.
Fo
20 64. Beukers A. Low Cost Production Technique for Sandwich Structures. 1st Core Conference.
21 Zurich1989.
22 65. Beukers A. An unfoamed foil suitable as an adhesive. Patent EP0345855, Netherlands, 1989.
23 66. Brambach JA. Sandwich panel material, and a method of providing a local reinforcement in a
rP
24 sandwich structure. Patent European Patent 383409, Netherlands, 1990.

25 67. Provo Kruit PWC. The Development of In-Situ Foamed Sandwich Panels. PhD thesis, Delft
26 University of Technology, Netherland, 1997.
ee
27 68. Technology F. Technical data FITS PEI, http://fits-technology.com/technicaldata.html (2020).

28 69. Chikugo R, Ashibe Y and Yoshii A. Feasibility Study on Mass-Production Forming of
29 Thermoplastic Sandwich Structure with Foam Core. In: 39th International SAMPE Symposium
rR
30 Anaheim, 1994.
31 70. Grünewald J. Thermoplastic composite sandwiches for structural helicopter applications. PhD
32 Thesis, Universität Bayreuth, Germany, 2018.
71. Neumeyer T, Knoechel JF, Mühlbacher M, et al. Thermoplastic Sandwich Structures - Processing
ev
33
34 Approaches Towards Automotive Serial Production. In: 21st International Conference on Composite
35 Materials (ICCM-21) Xi'an, 2017.
36 72. Åkermo M and Astrom T. Modelling component cost in compression moulding of thermoplastic
iew
37 composite and sandwich components. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing 2000;
38 31: 319-333.
39 73. Ye L, Lu M and Mai YW. Thermal de-consolidation of thermoplastic matrix composites—I.
40 Growth of voids. Composites Science & Technology 2002; 62: 2121-2130.
41
74. Rozant O, Bourban PE and Mnson JAE. Warp-knit laminates for stampable sandwich preforms.
Composites Science & Technology 2001; 61: 145-156.
42
75. Akermo M and Astrom BT. Experimental Investigation of Compression Molding of Glass/PP-PP
43
Foam Core Sandwich Components. Journal of Thermoplastic Composite Materials 1999; 12: 297-316.
44
76. Åkermo M and Åström T. Modelling face-core bonding in sandwich manufacturing:
45
Thermoplastic faces and rigid closed-cell foam core. Composites Part A: Applied Science and
46
Manufacturing 1998; 29: 485-494.
47
77. McGarva LD and Åström BT. Experimental investigation of compression moulding of
48
glass/PA12-PMI foam core sandwich components. Composites Part A: Applied Science and
49
Manufacturing 1999; 30: 1171-1185.
50
78. Stubbing R. Characterisation of Polymeric Foam Cores Using Digital Image Correlation. PhD
51
thesis, The University of Auckland, New Zealand, 2014.
52
79. Layne AM and Carlsson LA. Test method for measuring strength of a curved sandwich beam.
53
Experimental Mechanics 2002; 42: 194-199.
54
80. Smidt S. Bending of curved sandwich beams. Composite Structures 1995; 33: 211-225.
55
81. Wang W and Shenoi RA. Analytical Solutions to Predict Flexural Behavior of Curved Sandwich
56
Beams. Journal of Sandwich Structures & Materials 2004; 6: 199-216.
57
58 31
59
1
2
3 82. Thomsen OT and Vinson JR. Analysis and Parametric Study of Non-Circular Pressurized
4 Sandwich Fuselage Cross Section Using a High-Order Sandwich Theory Formulation. Journal of
5 Sandwich Structures & Materials 2001; 3: 220-250.
6 83. Smidt S. Bending of curved sandwich beams, a numerical approach. Composite Structures 1996;
7 34: 279-290.
8 84. Ronkay F, Molnar B and Dogossy G. The effect of mold temperature on chemical foaming of
9 injection molded recycled polyethylene-terephthalate. Thermochimica Acta 2017; 651: 65-72.
10 85. Gómez-Gómez FJ, Arencón D, Sánchez-Soto MÁ, et al. Influence of the injection moulding
11 parameters on the microstructure and thermal properties of microcellular polyethylene terephthalate
12 glycol foams. Journal of Cellular Plastics 2012; 49: 47-63.
13 86. Gosselin R and Rodrigue D. Cell morphology analysis of high density polymer foams. Polymer
14 Testing 2005; 24: 1027-1035.
15 87. Ries S, Spoerrer A and Altstaedt V. Foam injection molding of thermoplastic elastomers: Blowing
16 agents, foaming process and characterization of structural foams. 29th International Conference of the
17 Polymer-Processing-Society (PPS). Nuremberg, Germany,2013.
18 88. Standau T, Zhao C, Murillo Castellón S, et al. Chemical Modification and Foam Processing of
19 Polylactide (PLA). Polymers 2019; 11: 306.
Fo
20 89. Mhlbacher M, Hornfeck C, Neumeyer T, et al. Thermoplastische Sandwichstrukturen aus
21 Luftfahrtmaterialien. Lightwght Design 2016; 9: 44-49.
22 90. Gensel J, Pawelski C and Altstdt V. Welding quality in polymer bead foams: An in situ SEM
23 study. 32nd International Conference of the Polymer Processing Society. Lyon2017.
rP
24 91. Rossacci J and Shivkumar S. Bead fusion in polystyrene foams. Journal of Materials Science
25 2003; 38: 201-206.
26 92. Rossacci J and Shivkumar S. Influence of EPS bead fusion on pattern degradation and casting
ee
27 formation in the lost foam process. Journal of Materials Science 2003; 38: 2321-2330.
28 93. Järvelä P, Sarlin J, Järvelä P, et al. A method to measure the fusion strength between expanded
29 polystyrene (EPS) beads. Journal of Materials Science 1986; 21: 3139-3142.
rR
30 94. BASF. Neopolen P - Technical information, https://plastics-rubber.basf.com (2020).

31 95. Hossieny, Nemat, Ameli, et al. Characterizationof Expanded Polypropylene Bead Foamswith
32 Modified Steam-Chest Molding. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2013; 52: 8236-8247.
96. Neumeyer T, Schreier P, Knoechel J, et al. Thermoplastic Sandwich Structures with Bead Foam
ev
33
34 Core - Novel Processing Approaches. 12th International Conference on Sandwich Structures.
35 Lausanne2018.
36 97. Lee YS, Park NH and Yoon HS. Dynamic Mechanical Characteristics of Expanded Polypropylene
iew
37 Foams. Journal of Cellular Plastics 2010; 46: 43-55.

38 98. Mills NJ and Gilchrist A. Properties of bonded-polypropylene-bead foams: data and modelling.
39 Journal of Materials Science 2007; 42: 3177-3189.
40 99. Armacell. Technical Data ArmaForm® Core GR, https://www.armacell.com (2020).
41
100. AIREX. Airex R82 Datasheet, https://www.3accorematerials.com (2020).
101. SABIC. ULTEM FOAM XP080 Datasheet, https://www.sabic.com (2018).
42
102. Gibson L and Ashby M. Cellular Solids: Structure And Properties. Cambridge University
43
Press, 1997.
44
103. Diab. Technical Data Divinycell HP, www.diabgroup.com (2020).
45
104. Tsujimoto M, Fukuoka T, Kurio H, et al. Process for producing foamable composite polyolefin
46
resin sheet and composite foam. Patent EP1027977A1, Germany, 2003.
47
105. Ui T, Mitsuoka Y and Matsumoto M. Heat-foamable sheet and its method of manufacture.
48
Patent EP1764203A2, Germany, 2007.
49
106. Hayashi Y, Mitsuoka Y and Ui T. Thermally foamable resin composition, thermally foamable
50
resin sheet, foam, and production method thereof. Patent US20140088211A1, US, 2014.
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58 32
59
View publication stats

Review Manufacture of Polymeric Foam Cores For Sandwich Structures of Complex Shape

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review Manufacture of Polymeric Foam Cores For Sandwich Structures of Complex Shape

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

A review on manufacture of polymeric foam cores for sandwich structures of

Article in Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials · June 2021

Youming Chen Raj Das

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Aircraft Sustainment and Repair View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

A Review on Manufacture of Polymeric Foam Cores for

Journal: Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials

Manuscript Type: Standard Article

Date Submitted by the

Complete List of Authors: Chen, Youming; Wuhan University of Technology,

Sandwich structures, Thermoforming, Foam injection moulding, Bead

foaming, Film foaming

In this work, polymeric foam thermoforming, foam injection moulding,

27 shape are required. Commercial core materials including high-performance foams,

37 Composite sandwich structures are deemed to be an ideal alternative to conventional materials,

thermoformed sandwich part.

27 formed 90o foam bends at the corner is no longer uniform [8].

37 3.1 Injection moulding

Mould Opening Ejection of the

Processing temperature 155±2.5 oC

30 (a) mould closing (b) heating

24 mechanical properties, theoretically, foam cores manufactured by thermoforming of them

sandwich structures of complex geometry for automotive applications.

24 19. Breuer U, Ostgathe M and Neitzel M. Manufacturing of all-thermoplastic sandwich systems by a

24 Structure and Properties of Microcellular Polylactide–Polylactide Nanocomposites. Polymers 2018;

37 Properties of Injection Molded Thermoplastic Polyolefin (TPO) Cellular Foams. Macromolecular

24 sandwich structure. Patent European Patent 383409, Netherlands, 1990.

27 68. Technology F. Technical data FITS PEI, http://fits-technology.com/technicaldata.html (2020).

30 94. BASF. Neopolen P - Technical information, https://plastics-rubber.basf.com (2020).

37 Foams. Journal of Cellular Plastics 2010; 46: 43-55.

View publication stats

You might also like