pss b
solidi
Phys. Status Solidi B, 1–20 (2013) / DOI 10.1002/pssb.201248550
A review of the manufacture,
mechanical properties and potential
applications of auxetic foams
Richard Critchley, Ilaria Corni*, Julian A. Wharton**, Frank C. Walsh, Robert J. K. Wood,
and Keith R. Stokes
National Centre of Advanced Tribology at Southampton (nCATS), University of Southampton, University Road, Southampton,
SO17 1BJ, UK
Received 14 November 2012, revised 11 March 2013, accepted 14 March 2013
Published online 24 April 2013
Keywords auxetic, impact, Poisson’s ratio, reticulated foams, smart materials
* Corresponding author: e-mail i.corni@soton.ac.uk, Phone: þ44(0)2380592890, Fax: þ44(0)2380593016
** e-mail j.a.wharton@soton.ac.uk, Phone: þ44(0)2380592890, Fax: þ44(0)2380593016
Auxetics are a modern class of material fabricated by altering
the material microstructure. Unlike conventional materials,
auxetics exhibit a negative Poisson’s ratio when subjected to
tensile loading. These materials have gained popularity within
the research community because of their enhanced properties,
such as density, stiffness, fracture toughness and dampening.
This paper provides a critical oversight of the auxetic field with
1 Introduction Poisson’s ratio (n) is defined as the
ratio between the longitudinal expansion and the lateral
contraction of a material during loading [1]. Conventional
materials present a positive Poisson’s ratio and their cross-
section becomes larger in compression and smaller in tension
(Fig. 1a) [2, 3]. Thermodynamic considerations of strain
energy in the theory of elasticity demonstrate that the
Poisson’s ratio for a homogeneous solid isotropic material
could be between 1 and 0.5, thus allowing the existence of
materials with a negative Poisson’s ratio [1, 4–6]. This class
of materials is identified with the term ‘auxetics’, that derives
from the Greek word ‘auxetikos’ which means ‘that tends to
increase’ and Poisson’s ratios are as low as 0.7 for
polymers and 0.8 for metals [7, 8]. Auxetic materials are
characterised by a counterintuitive behaviour, which is
evident by applying a tensile load in one direction they
expand in all directions (Fig. 1b) [9, 10], or more simply they
become fatter, laterally, when stretched lengthwise.
Auxetic materials constitute a new class of materials
that can be found in nature, i.e. cubic elemental metals,
a-cristobalite (high temperature polymorphic mineral),
and biological tissues, i.e. cat skin and cow teat skin
physica
status
www.pss-b.com
basic solid state physics
Feature Article
particular emphasis to the auxetic foams, due to their low price,
easy availability and desirable mechanical properties. Key
areas discussed include the fabrication method, the effects
played by different parameters (temperature, heating time, cell
shape and size and volumetric compression ratio), micro-
structural models, mechanical properties and potential appli-
cations.
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
[11, 12]. These materials demonstrate unique and enhanced
mechanical properties and for this reason numerous
researches have been carried out to understand the
mechanisms that render a material auxetic and to reproduce
these mechanisms and properties in man-made materials.
To date a wide range of auxetic materials, such as polymers,
metals, ceramics, composites, laminates and fibres have
been manufactured (see Fig. 2a) using a particular fabrica-
tion process that results in a change of the material structure
[11–14]. A timeline for the discovery and the areas in which
man-made and natural auxetic materials are available (with
their length-scale) are reported in Fig. 2a and b, respectively.
The increased interest in the research and applications of
auxetic materials is demonstrated by the increased number of
patent filed (Fig. 3a) and research paper published (Fig. 3b)
since the late 1980s. Auxetic materials can be currently
found in commercially available products such as polytetra-
fluorethylene (PTFE) and GoreTex [15]; since their initial
proposal by Love, numerous organisations including
Toyota, Yamaha, Mitsubishi, AlliedSignal Inc., BNFL and
the US Office of Naval Research have filed numerous patents
[15, 16].
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
 pss b
solidi
physica
status
2 R. Critchley et al.: Manufacture, mechanical properties and applications of auxetic foams
Figure 1 Differences between (a) a positive and (b) a negative Poisson’s ratio material (adapted from Ref. [11]).
Several reviews on auxetic materials have been pub-
lished dedicating particular attention to known auxetic
materials, different types of auxetic microstructures and their
applications [11, 13, 17–21]. The aim of this paper is to
provide critical overview of auxetic foams, their processing
methods, deformation mechanisms and applications. Auxe-
tic foams have been chosen from all the various auxetic
materials since the auxetic effect and the mechanisms
involved have been widely studied using open cell
polyurethane foam; their low price, easy availability and
fabrication method further increase their attractiveness as
materials. The mechanical properties and the possible
applications of auxetic foams have also been reviewed,
while new areas of study that have yet to be explored are
proposed.
2 Methods to convert conventional foams into
auxetic The manufacturing of auxetic foams was first
reported in 1987 by Lakes [3] (although the concept of
auxetic foams were proposed in 1985 by Kolpakov) [23],
who suggested two different manufacturing procedures: one
for polymeric and one for metallic foams.
2.1 Methods for the conversion of polymeric
foams For polymeric materials, Lakes started with a
conventional open-cell foam and made it auxetic by making
the ribs of each cell protrude inward producing a re-entrant
structure [3]. This change is achieved in a three-step process
in which the open cell foam is tri-axially compressed, heated
to a temperature slightly higher than the softening tempera-
ture of the material and cooled at room temperature to store
potential energy in the compressed ribs [3, 13, 24]. The
compression stage of the process changes the shape of
the cellular ribs and the heating and cooling stages soften
and fix the ribs in a new position.
The main problems that have been identified as
dependent on the auxetic conversion process are: long-term
instability with the samples reverting back to their original
shape and structure, severe surface creasing and inability to
produce large samples. For example Bianchi et al. [5] noticed
that following the auxetic conversion, within hours, the
samples would naturally attempt to return to their original
dimensions. This behaviour was also reported by Scarpa
et al. [10], who noticed that the final volumetric compression
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
ratio (the change in volume from the sample original
dimensions to the new dimensions obtained after the
conversion expressed as a ratio) could differ up to 52%
from the originally applied value while the sample density
was susceptible to a time-dependant change of up to 30%
after a week. This behaviour is most likely the result of creep,
which occurs as a consequence of the long-term exposure to
stresses and not sufficient heating times employed during
the fabrication process. The surface creasing and wrinkles
observed in the more deformable regions of the foam
specimen are due to the volumetric compression ratio
applied during fabrication [24, 25]. In order to resolve this
problem, two solutions have been suggested: lubrication of
the mould (the lubricant should not be an oil-derivative or a
distilled oil due to their instability at high temperatures and
the production of unpleasant smells) [6, 24, 26] and the use of
wires or tweezers inside the moulds to pull the foam instead
of pushing it [10]. A further solution would be to redesign
the moulds so that the tri-axial compression is applied at a
uniform rate and no creasing areas form. Another solution
has been reported by Chan and Evans in 1997 [24], they
attempted to resolve the formation of wrinkles on the sample
surface by applying the volumetric compression in several
stages in order to produce a more homogeneous auxetic
material.
Since 1987, this production process has been applied by
numerous investigations and a number of modifications have
been reported [2–5, 10, 24–32]. While each has been altered
either to produce differences within the polymeric materials
or to optimise the process the overall principle has remained
the same, i.e. volumetric compression followed by heating
and cooling [4, 24, 31]. These modifications are described
below.
2.2 Multi-phase auxetic fabrication Bianchi et al.
[5] further modified the fabrication process by incorporating
a re-conversion back to conventional foam via a shape
memory polymer (SMP) process followed by a second
auxetic conversion. Auxetic materials can be considered as
an SMP even if the fabrication process is usually intended as
a permanent structural change. Indeed it has been observed
that the application of an external trigger, such as exposure
to a solvent or heat, reverts the auxetic foam back to its
conventional state and dimensions. The re-conversion
www.pss-b.com
 Feature
Article

Phys. Status Solidi B (2013) 3

Figure 2 (a) Timeline for the discovery of natural and man-made auxetic materials, (b) areas where auxetic materials have been discovered
and their size (adapted from Ref. [11]).

www.pss-b.com ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

 pss b
solidi
physica
status
4 R. Critchley et al.: Manufacture, mechanical properties and applications of auxetic foams
Figure 3 (a) Number of patents filed (information taken from Ref.
[22]) and (b) number of auxetic papers published since the discovery
of the auxetic materials where bracketed numbers indicate the
number of review papers published that year.
process is undertaken by heating the unconstrained auxetic
samples to a temperature near to the auxetic conversion
temperature (200 8C) and allowing them to relax. The
authors observed that at around 90 8C the samples began to
expand towards their original dimensions, requiring only
a couple of seconds to regain their original size (at a
temperature of 135 8C the auxetic samples completely
recovered their original dimensions) [5, 28]. The sample
that returned to the conventional state had lost all the auxetic
properties and behaviour and presented a positive Poisson’s
ratio, these were regained again when the sample was re-
converted to auxetic [5].
A similar study was also reported by Grima et al. [33]
that re-converted auxetic samples into conventional samples
by placing them in acetone followed by air-drying (during
acetone exposure the foam re-expanded in all directions).
The re-converted samples presented a positive Poisson’s
ratio and a conventional honeycomb structure.
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
2.2.1 Solvent-based auxetic fabrication More
recently Grima et al. [33] presented a novel chemo-
mechanical process for the fabrication of auxetic foams;
conventional polyurethane samples were mechanically
compressed, wrapped in filter paper, placed in acetone for
1 h and then air dried. After being removed from the moulds,
the samples fabricated with this methodology retained the
compressed shape and exhibited auxetic behaviour. When
compared to thermo-mechanical fabricated auxetic samples,
it was found that both sample types exhibited negative
Poisson’s ratios of approximately 0.3 and presented highly
convoluted auxetic microstructure.
2.2.2 Vac-bag auxetic fabrication Bianchi et al.
[34] recently presented a novel manufacturing methodology
using a vac-bag system. Unlike classical manufacturing
methods that are limited to rectangular or cylindrical
geometries and to a volume of only a couple of cubic
centimetres, the vac-bag fabrication is capable of producing
samples with complex shapes, such as arcs, and large
volumes (30 cm  16 cm  3 cm).
The vac-bag method requires a sheet of conventional
foam to be placed upon a semi-circular mould and layered
over with a non-porous fluorinated ethylene propylene
release film followed by a medium weigh polyester non-
woven breather blanket which covers both the mould and the
foam sample. After sealing the bag, a vacuum pump is
employed to reduce the internal pressure down to 0.7 bar
causing the foam to be drawn into the mould and to gain the
mould curvature. The mould and foam are then placed into a
furnace at 200 8C and heated for 30 min. After been removed
from the mould, the foam displayed auxeticity and the
natural curvature of the mould. SEM analysis further
confirmed the auxeticity of the foam although each side of
the sample presented different configurations. Through
tensile and cyclic loading testing, it was found that the
maximum negative Poisson’s ratio achieved by this foam
was 1.26 at 5% strain and the maximum energy dissipation
was 1.42 mJ cm3. The Poisson’s ratio of around 1
indicates that the sample produced was anisotropic.
2.2.3 Dual density auxetic fabrication Bianchi
et al. [35] have also recently presented a more classical
example of auxetic fabrication resulting in large changes of
the density of the auxetic foams. Manufacturing saw two
batches of foam samples of varying dimensions placed into a
metallic tube mould and compressed. The mould was then
placed into an oven and heated at 200 8C for 15, 45 and
60 min to temperatures of 135, 150 and 170 8C, respectively.
Samples heated for 15 min were cooled at room temperature
(20 8C) for 5 min, whilst the 45 and 60 min samples were
instantly removed from the moulds, stretched then allowed to
cool at room temperature.
The removal of the foam from the mould instantly after
the heating step creates a differentiated microstructure
between the external and internal part of the specimen: a
stiff outer layer and a less dense core. This behaviour is
www.pss-b.com

Phys. Status Solidi B (2013)
suggested to be directly caused by the non-homogenous
temperature distribution in the foam body, where only
the higher temperatures penetrate the external regions of the
sample, and not the interior. Densities were also found to
be affected based upon the time a sample spent waiting to
be removed, with those waiting longer exhibiting higher
densities. This feature is likely to be the result of the samples
being tri-axially constrained whilst cooling, thus stopping
the ribs from protruding towards their original structure.
Samples fabricated through this novel route were also found
to only exhibit a negative Poisson’s ratio under compression
due to the non-homogenous microstructure caused in
manufacture. The greatest negative Poisson’s ratio achieved
in this instance was 0.34.
2.3 Methods for conversion of metallic
foams For metallic materials, Lakes stated that reticulated
metal foam specimens were transformable into auxetics by
compressing the material successively in each of the three
perpendicular directions at room temperature (18–23 8C).
The foams subjected to this procedure exhibited a re-entrant
cell structure [3]. This methodology has also been applied by
other authors, with little to no known changes being
introduced [2, 36]. However, it has been suggested by Friis
et al. [2] that, in principle, the thermal transformation
technique used for thermoplastic foams could be applied also
to metallic foams, although this may be difficult due to the
higher and sharper melting points of metals.
3 Parameters affecting manufacture of auxetic
foams From the literature [4, 5, 28, 29, 32], it is clear that
there are many variables influencing the manufacture of
auxetic foams, such as the composition of the material, its
relative density and cell size, the processing temperature and
heating-time, the humidity and the volumetric compression
ratio applied [29]. There is still much debate regarding which
are the key factors influencing the process. For example
Wang et al. [32] stated that the main physical parameters
influencing the auxetic transformation process are the
volumetric compression ratio, the processing temperature
and the heating time. However, other authors [4, 5, 28]
consider only the volumetric compression ratio as the main
parameter responsible for a successful conversion, with the
other parameters acting as secondary influence. Although
an exact relationship between the effects that each of the
parameters play in the transformation is still unknown, the
influences that the different process parameters have on
the final results are reviewed below. There have been also
attempts to identify the relationships between the manufac-
turing parameters and the final material properties (density,
Poisson’s ratio, stiffness and energy dissipation) [4].
3.1 Influence of temperature and heating
times Lakes reported that for a polyester open cell foam
the ideal temperature to be applied in the conversion process
was between 163 and 171 8C, just above the softening
temperature of the material [3]. This statement was then
www.pss-b.com
Feature
Article
5
followed by numerous studies attempting to determine the
methodology and the justification behind this choice of
temperature. In 1997, Chan and Evans employed a
thermocouple placed in the centre of a foam specimen to
determine the softening temperature of the material when the
cell ribs collapsed [24]. This experiment suggested that the
temperature employed for the auxetic conversion should
be between 5 and 20 8C lower than the softening temperature
of the material. Conversely Evans and Alderson [2, 11],
supported by Friis et al. [2] employed a heating temperature
above the softening point and Wang et al. [32] suggested that
the conversion temperature should be equal or greater than
the softening temperature of the material. From the results
reported, it is reasonable to assume that Chan and Evans’
suggestion of keeping the conversion temperature below the
materials softening temperature (e.g. 180 8C) was incorrect
and instead the temperature employed should in fact be equal
or above the softening temperature of the conventional
polymeric foam, as this allows for the softening of the
polymeric ribs to occur [24].
Whilst attempting to determine the reasons behind the
temperature values published by Lakes [3], Chan and Evans
reported several interesting observations [24]. They
observed that if the heating time was too long the foam
would either decompose or melt with the cell ribs sticking
together to form a dense block of material, and if the heating
time was too short the foam could not be ‘set’ into its new re-
entrant structure and would soon begin to expand back to its
original size [24]. Choi and Lakes and Bianchi et al. [4, 29]
further confirmed this behaviour with the rate at which the
negative Poisson’s ratio was lost fluctuating from a few days
to a few months. Furthermore, Chan and Evans noticed that
the heating time needed to turn a conventional porous
material into an auxetic one depended on the exact type of
foam and hence initial base material and porosity [24]. Wang
et al. confirmed these observations and further suggested that
the cell size was also an important factor influencing the
auxetic fabrication. It was found that polyurethane foams
having a smaller cell size required higher heating tempera-
tures and heating times compared to foams with larger pore
size. It was speculated that this behaviour could be due to
either the surface tension effects within smaller cells or to a
possible difference in the chemistry of the material [32].
Other notable effects of the temperature on the auxetic
conversion process have been reported when studying the
early stages of heating and cooling. During the early stages of
heating at temperatures of 100–135 8C, Bianchi et al. [28]
noticed using thermogravimetric analysis that conventional
foams experience an approximate 2% loss in weight. It is
suggested that the loss in weight could potentially explain the
difference in mechanical properties between conventional
and auxetic materials during the multi-phase conversion
(phase 1: conventional, phase 2: first auxetic, phase 3:
returned conventional and phase 4: second auxetic). During
cooling, numerous studies have shown that the specimens
should be cooled at room temperature, as set out by Lakes [3,
24, 29]. In 2008, Bianchi et al. [4] introduced an alternative
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
 pss b

solidi
physica

status
6 R. Critchley et al.: Manufacture, mechanical properties and applications of auxetic foams

distribution was obtained. It was speculated that uniform

temperature distribution and alternative density values occur
as the water jet induces a significant thermal shock to the
sample.
Many authors have studied the effects of temperature on
the fabrication of auxetic materials but there are still
discrepancies associated with determining an optimum
temperature and heating time to be employed. These
discrepancies are likely the result of the variance in materials
and equipment that each individual researcher has employed
for the experiments. Numerous temperature–time combi-
nations have been reported in the literature and are
summarised in Fig. 4, where the heating time varied from 6
to 60 min [24, 35] but the majority of the time–temperature
combinations were less than 20 min. The temperature
applied varied between 130 and 220 8C [4, 24, 28, 32], this
wide range of temperatures can be explained considering the
findings of Wang et al. [32] that foams with smaller cell size
need higher heating temperatures and shorter processing
times compared to foams with larger pore size. The wide
ranges in which both the heating time and the temperature
have been varied seem extreme and therefore more studies
are needed to understand the effect that these two variables
have on the auxetic conversion process.

3.2 Influence of cell shape Since the auxetic

Figure 4 Diagram showing the different time–temperature profiles
for auxetic fabrication reported in the literature.
cooling method in which samples were cooled in water for
5 min. Specimens cooled in water exhibited unusual density
values compared to samples that were cooled in air. The
numerical differences are unknown as Bianchi et al. [4] did
not reported the actual numerical values. It was further noted
that by employing water cooling a more uniform temperature
materials were first produced [3] the most commonly
reported auxetic foams produced were thermoplastic (poly-
ester urethane, polyether urethane), thermosetting (silicone
rubber) and metallic (copper) [11]. However, the foam most
employed has been the open-cell polyurethane foam due to
its availability and ease of application [9] as shown in
Table 1. Even though polyurethane has been widely studied
only a few studies have investigated the effect that pore size
on the auxetic conversion process [2–5, 8, 18–22, 24–27].

Table 1 Examples of foams employed by various research groups.

pore size
density
authors year material (pores per reference
(kg m3)
linear inch)

Chan and Evans 1997 closed-cell polyester urethane foam 60 39.9 [24]
Chan and Evans 1997 reticulated polyester urethane foam 60 33.7 [24]
Chan and Evans 1997 open-cell polyether urethane foam 10 24.1 [24]
Chan and Evans 1997 open-cell polyether urethane foam 30 24.5 [24]
Chan and Evans 1997 open-cell polyether urethane foam 60 21.7 [24]
Bianchi et al. 2008 conventional grey open-cell polyurethane 30–35 27.2 [4]
Scarpa et al. 2002 open-cell polyurethane foam not given 32 [26]
Wang et al. 2001 open-cell polyurethane foam 20 30 [32]
Wang et al. 2001 open-cell polyurethane foam 65 30 [32]
Wang et al. 2001 open-cell polyurethane foam 100 33 [32]
Scarpa et al. 2005 conventional grey open-cells polyurethane 30–35 27 [10]
Bianchi et al. 2010 grey-coloured open-cell polyurethane-based foam 30–35 27.2 [5]
Bianchi et al. 2010 conventional light-blue-coloured open-cell polyurethane-based foams 52–57 27 [5]
Bianchi et al. 2010 grey-coloured open-cell polyurethane-based foams 30–35 27.2 [28]
Bianchi et al. 2010 conventional light-blue-coloured open-cell polyurethane-based foams 52–57 27 [28]
Scarpa et al. 2004 open cell polyurethane grey foam 30–35 32 [27]

ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.pss-b.com

 Feature
Article

Phys. Status Solidi B (2013) 7

One of the more comprehensive studies on the effect that bow-tie re-entrant microstructure (Fig. 6). Both models for
cell shape and size have on the properties of the foam was the auxetic and conventional pores are described in more
reported by Chan and Evans [37]. They specifically studied detail below.
the microstructure and the deformation mechanisms of
conventional and auxetic open-cell foams and observed that 3.3 Conventional model For conventional foams
the cell size was not the dominating factor in determining the reported in Fig. 5, the cell length can be calculated using the
mechanical properties, while the cell shape and geometry following equations [37]:
were found to be greater contributor, as also reported in Ref.
[38]. The cell geometry is influenced by the manufacture Maximum: AD ¼ h þ 4L sinu; (1)
process of the conventional foam that is formed by injecting Minimum: BC ¼ h þ 2L sinu; (2)
gas in the semi-liquid material, the gas dissipates throughout
the material then the liquid is cooled to the solid state Average: y ¼ h þ 3L sinu; (3)
retaining the air pockets formed by the gas. The air pockets
are somewhat elongated and therefore the foam could be and the cell width at any point can be taken as:
anisotropic [37, 39]. By assuming that the mechanical Normal: EF ¼ 2L cosu; (4)
properties of the foams are similar to those of the solid
material employed for their production, the main variable Average: x ¼ 2L cosu: (5)
affecting the foam mechanical properties is its cellular
geometry [37]. It should be noted that although the foams can
be treated similarly to their solid counterparts, they are 3.4 Auxetic model For auxetic foams the cell length
considerably less stiff [1, 7, 40]. can be given by the following equations (all the parameters
Chan and Evans studied and modelled the cell are specifically related to Fig. 6):
geometries and volumes in two and three dimensions for Maximum: GE ¼ h; (6)
conventional (see Fig. 5) and auxetic foams (see Fig. 6),
where nearly 100 specimens were measured to achieve a Minimum: BC ¼ h  2L sinu; (7)
sufficient statistical analysis of the data set [37]. They
observed that once the conventional foam has been Average: H ¼ h  L sinu; (8)
converted to an auxetic structure the cell geometry no longer
the auxetic cell width can be obtained by:
resembles that of an ellipsoid with the smaller side within the
direction of rise (Fig. 5), but becomes more reminiscent of Normal: EF ¼ 2L cosu; (9)

Figure 5 Schematic representation of (a) a three-dimensional (3-D) geometry for a conventional foam and (b) a two-dimensional (2-D)
geometry of the same pore type (adapted from Ref. [37]).

www.pss-b.com ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

 pss b

solidi
physica

status
8 R. Critchley et al.: Manufacture, mechanical properties and applications of auxetic foams

Figure 6 Diagrammatic representation of (a) 3-D geometry of an auxetic pore and (b) 2-D geometry of the same auxetic pore (adapted from
Ref. [37]).

and the auxetic mid-plane waist height is calculated using: subjected to a screening process where samples were
manufactured at temperatures between 120 and 280 8C and
Maximum: JK ¼ h  2L sinu; (10) processing time between 5 and 21 min at a volumetric
compression ratio of approximately 2.5, yielding a total of
Minimum: AD ¼ h  4L sinu; (11) 48 samples, the data is shown in Fig. 7.
It was found that for the 100 PPI foam, the optimal
Average: W ¼ h  3L sinu: (12) processing parameters were a heating time between 8 and
12 min, a temperature between 210 and 230 8C. Whereas the
It is important to underline that although these models best conditions for the 20 and 60 PPI foam specimens were a
allow estimating the cell geometry, real samples contain heating times of 17 and 13 min and a temperature of 170 and
numerous cellular and structural anomalies. A foam speci- 190 8C, respectively. These results show that smaller cell
men contains a variety of cell shapes with four to six sides size foams prefer higher temperatures and shorter heating
and a wide range of cell sizes, some of which are so small that time.
deformation is not possible and therefore act as junction
points within the foam [37]. They also observed that the
foams tested were slightly elongated due to the foam
manufacturing process. While each of these anomalies
discredits somewhat the proposed mathematical model,
it should be underlined that the model should not be
disregarded, since it can still provide insightful information
for the cell geometry.
One area that Chan and Evans failed to address in this
study was to understand how the cellular size affected the
overall negative Poisson’s ratio of the foam [37]. Wang et al.
[32] found that for a number of polymeric foam specimens,
the lower the number of pores per inch (PPI), i.e. the larger
the cell size, then the greater the negative Poisson’s ratio.

3.5 Effect of the cell size The material porosity and

therefore the cell-size is a further factor affecting the auxetic
conversion process. Wang et al. [32] tested three poly-
urethane foams with porosity of 20, 65 and 100 PPI and
in order to explore the effects that the pore size has on the
Poisson’s ratio, Scott reticulated 100 PPI white foam was
Figure 7 Comparison of the 100 PPI samples manufactured in
different conditions for the screening process to test the effects of
pore size, adapted from Ref. [32].

ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.pss-b.com


Phys. Status Solidi B (2013)
3.6 Effect of applied volumetric compression
ratio The volumetric compression ratio (Rc) is defined as
the ratio between the original volume (Vo) and the final
volume (Vf) after the auxetic conversion of the specimen
[24]. The volumetric compression ratio plays a critical role in
the auxetic conversion process and it has been observed that
failure to apply a value within the optimum range can result
in an unsuccessful conversion process. It has been reported
in the literature that different types of materials exhibit
different maximum volumetric compression ratio values.
For example, Lakes stated that for the open-cell polymeric
foam he employed the optimal volumetric compression ratio
was between 1.4 and 4 [3]. More recently, Choi and Lakes
reported that in order to have a successful auxetic conversion
the volumetric compression ratio had to be between 2 and 5
[32, 36]. Although optimum compression ratio ranges have
been suggested, it has to be remembered that the optimum
permanent compression to achieve the best negative
Poisson’s ratio depends on the initial foam density and
appears to have a purely geometrical origin, as the same
negative Poisson’s ratio value was observed for metallic and
polymeric foams with the same relative density [36]. The
majority of Rc values reported in the literature fell within
this range [2, 7, 10, 27, 28, 41]; however, experiments with
greater volumetric compression ratios have also been
reported but only with respect to mechanical testing and
not volumetric effects [31].
The compression ratio has also been described in terms
of volumetric percentage change [10, 42], which differs from
the volumetric compression ratio, as no optimum percentage
range has been outlined. However, from estimates given
in the literature, the optimal percentage range may be
approximated as being between 30 and 94% of the original
volume; converting these values into volumetric com-
pression ratios, it can be found that the optimal range is
between 1.43 and 16.1. While this range seems too wide to be
considered as a useful optimal range, it is in agreement with
the commonly accepted 2–5 range previously defined by
Lakes [32, 36], which as a percentage equates to 50–80% of
the original volume.
The volumetric compression ratio is the most important
and influential parameter in the auxetic manufacture [4, 5,
28, 32], in fact it has been observed to influence both the
auxetic microstructure and the mechanical properties
of the foam. However, the volumetric compression ratio
is also susceptible to the effects of other variables, such
as temperature and pore size. For example, Choi and Lakes
reported that when a large volumetric compression ratio is
applied together with time and temperature values outside
the optimum conditions, the ribs in the foam become stuck
together [29]. It has been observed that applying smaller
volumetric compression ratios produces samples with a very
low negative or almost positive Poisson’s ratio values [27].
However, Wang et al. [32] noted that, within the optimum
volumetric compression range of 2–5, specimens with lower
volumetric compression ratios were found to exhibit greater
negative Poisson’s ratios. This behaviour was once again
www.pss-b.com
Feature
Article
9
observed by Bianchi et al. [28], where it was further noticed
that lower volumetric compression ratios produced greater
tangent modulus values.
Metallic foams are also affected by the volumetric
compression ratio applied during the conversion process.
During a study of the non-linear properties of a copper-based
foam, Choi and Lakes reported an optimal volumetric
compression ratio of 3.6 [36]. This value was very similar to
those reported for polymeric foams with comparable density.
Interestingly, Choi and Lakes found that the metallic foams
were subjected to the same problems reported for polymeric
foams, e.g. when a volumetric compression ratio above the
optimum range is applied the auxetic behaviour became
obstruct because the ribs come into contact hindering
the unfolding mechanism [36]. It should be noted that to
the author’s knowledge little to no work has been published
on how the porosity of metallic foams affects the overall
volumetric compression ratio.
4 Foam structure and deformation mechanism
The cellular structure of conventional polymeric foams is
well-known; during the auxetic conversion process the
cellular structure completely changes and therefore it is
fundamental to understand the deformation mechanisms
involved. In order to understand the counterintuitive
behaviour of auxetic foams, numerous studies have analysed
how the cell ribs and the foam structure changes under
compression and tensile loading and proposed numerous
theories that will be summarised below.
4.1 Bow-tie or re-entrant cell model In the ear-
liest studies reported by Lakes the permanent inward
protrusion of the cell ribs during the conversion process
forming a ‘bow-tie’ structure was highlighted; this structure
is also known as re-entrant cellular structure [3]. Further
work by Lakes confirmed that the performance of the auxetic
foams is a result of the rib behaviour [43]. Following these
observations, the re-entrant cell model shown in Fig. 8 was
established; according to this model, the application of a
tensile load results in deformation of the cell ribs by bending,
which in turn leads to unfolding of the cells to their original
structure. This is further demonstrated by following the rib
movement in the scheme reported in Fig. 8. Applying a
tensile load, points A and B expand further apart attempting
Figure 8 Model describing the rib behaviour under tensile loading
adapted from Lakes et al. [43].
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
 pss b
solidi
physica
status
10 R. Critchley et al.: Manufacture, mechanical properties and applications of auxetic foams
to achieve the original hexagonal geometry of the cell, while
points C and D maintain a fixed position; the expansion of
A-B produces an increase in volume. Lakes also observed that
the bending was not crucial, with the same effect generated by
employing stretchable spring elements, with no rotational
constrains, that are allowed to pivot freely. Rothenburg et al.
[44] further proposed a similar approach in which each
elastic element within a randomly oriented network can be
represented as shock absorbing unit. By assuming that all the
orientations of the elastic elements have equal probability
of occurring, deformation can be said to be similar to that of
isotropic elastic materials; therefore the Poisson’s ratio is
shown to be determined by the ratio between normal and
tangential stiffness (l), where a negative Poisson’s ratio is
achieved when l > 1.
1l
v¼ : (13)
3þl
Within this arrangement, should three elastic elements
form a triangular structure, a compressive or tensile load in
one direction will cause the structure to either compress or
expand. Interestingly, by introducing a structural kink into
an elastic element, the axial stiffness of the collapsed bar is
greatly reduced, where the kink angle determines the stiffness
reduction. It is on this principle that the re-entrant structure
proposed by Lakes achieves a negative Poisson’s ratio.
4.2 Honeycomb model In 2000, Evans and Alder-
son presented a two-dimensional (2-D) model that described
the different structures of conventional and auxetic foams
under tensile loading [11]. This model represented the
conventional foams with a repeatable honeycomb structure
made of hexagonal geometries (as shown in Fig. 9a) and
Figure 9 2-D representation of conventional and auxetic foams
under loading: (a) conventional honeycomb structure and (b) auxetic
bow-tie structure (adapted from Ref. [11]).
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
the auxetic foam with a repeatable bow-tie structure (as
shown in Fig. 9b), as also proposed by Lakes [43]. In order
for this model to be valid it was assumed that the foam
presented a state of cellular symmetry, since it is known that
experimental foams are asymmetric and still convertible to
auxetic it could be concluded that the cellular symmetry is
not required for auxetic conversion to occur [5, 45]. When
tensile loading is applied in the y-direction, the hexagonal
cells in the conventional foam become elongated along the
stretch path and contract in the x-axis producing a positive
Poisson’s ratio (see Fig. 9a). By applying the same tensile
loading along the y-axis, the bow-tie cell in the auxetic foam
elongate in both the direction of stretch and the perpendicular
direction. However, this behaviour is anisotropic, as loading
in the y-axis will not yield the same results as loading in the
x-axis [37]. On the other hand, Lakes stated that although
some materials experienced anisotropic behaviour not all
auxetic materials are anisotropic [3, 37]. Moreover, it has
been suggested that auxetic foams produced via an isotropic
compression ratio have a tendency to exhibit superior
properties compared to their anisotropic counterparts [5].
The 2-D honeycomb model explained above has been
widely accepted by the research community for under-
standing the cellular structure and deformation mechanism
of 2-D foams [18, 25, 27, 46]. However, alternative models
have been proposed to explain the auxetic behaviour, most of
which work in conjunction with the bow-tie model.
4.3 Missing rib model Smith et al. [25] proposed the
missing rib foam model because, at the time of publication,
they believed that the models proposed by other groups were
satisfactory in describing the stress–strain behaviour of
conventional foams but were limited in describing the
auxetic behaviour. In this model the cellular internal angles
are not subjected to angular changes, but a fraction of the cell
ribs are removed, as shown in Fig. 10. This model is best
employed in the calculation of strain-dependent Poisson’s
ratio function, opposed to small-strain Poisson’s ratios, as
defined by Berthelot and Reinf [47]. The advantage of this
model is that both auxetic and conventional materials can
be described using realistic geometries and stress–strain
behaviours could be predicted slightly more accurately. The
disadvantages of this model result from both the assumption
that needs to be made (real world foams contain already
broken ribs which are randomly distributed) and its inability
to accurately describe the compression/heating effects on
fabrication. From this model Smith et al. [25] suggested that
during several scenarios of sample fabrication, it is plausible
to presume that there are multiple mechanisms causing
the auxetic conversion, i.e. concaved re-entrant cells and
missing ribs.
4.4 Rigid triangle model In 2005 Grima et al. [42]
proposed a further model to explain the 2-D behaviour of the
auxetic foams. This model assumed that the microstructural
changes induced during the compression/heating stage of the
fabrication preserved the cell joint geometry, whilst the rib
www.pss-b.com

Phys. Status Solidi B (2013)
Figure 10 Schematic of the missing rib foam model showing (a) an
intact conventional foam structure and the cut version with cell units
shaded, (b) more detailed version of selected cells for both intact and
cut versions alongside their geometry parameters (adapted from
Smith et al. [25]).
lengths were subjected to the main deformations, resulting in
buckling. Furthermore, this model assumed that due to the
increased thickness at the cell vertices it is possible to treat
the joints as rigid, thus allowing the behaviour to be
described in terms of beam mechanics, rotation and perfectly
rigid equilateral triangles, although in reality the ribs, joints
or microstructure are not perfect. When the foam is loaded,
the model predicts that the triangular joints rotate to return to
their original arrangement causing the rib to twist and unfold
producing a volumetric expansion, as shown in Fig. 11.
Based on this method the auxeticity depends mainly on the
joint rigidity and the flexibility of the connection ribs, with
other factors being less influent. Grima et al. [42] believe that
this model presents a dominant mechanism responsible for
the auxetic behaviour found after fabrication.
4.5 Three-dimensional (3-D) model Although
numerous models in 2-D have been suggested and accepted,
a 3-D model has yet to be agreed. Several authors have
attempted to produce a 3-D model starting from the 2-D
model and applying to it an extra axis utilising dodecahe-
drons and tetrakaidecahedrons [42, 45, 48–52]. This
approach is acceptable for a simplistic analysis, such as
those performed by a Finite Element Analysis, as the overall
auxetic foam structure and behaviour are reverted to a
basic level, where little to no variation to the structure is
considered.
In order to determine the true mechanisms of the auxetic
foams, some researchers have begun to study cell inter-
actions in 3-D analysing a small area and applying the
results to the whole specimen body. One of such studies
was undertaken by Chan and Evans [37], that employed
www.pss-b.com
Feature
Article
11
Figure 11 Steps in the rigid triangle model: (a) hexagonal honey-
comb model for a conventional foam, (b) rotation of rigid units model
for auxetic foams, (c) ideal model for the rotating rib model where
joints are shown as perfect rigidly equilateral triangles (adapted from
Grima et al. [42]).
microscopy to examine the microstructure and the defor-
mation mechanisms of conventional and auxetic materials.
By applying a compressive or tensile load the cell ribs in
both conventional and auxetic foams undergo a range
of deformation. The dominant deformation mechanism
depended on the loading type and the foam cell structure.
Conventional foams in compression deform primarily by
flexure and buckling when high strains are applied. During
tensile loading, the ribs perpendicular to the load also
deform by flexure. When a tensile load is applied, the cell ribs
of conventional foams deform through a combination of
hinging, stretching and flexing mechanisms (Fig. 12). Failure
finally occurs as a result of tensile fracture. In auxetic foams,
it was found that compressive and tensile loading produce
the same deformation mechanisms observed in conventional
foams, with the addition of rib rotations. Based on these
observations, Chan and Evans suggested that, as a general
rule, auxetic and conventional foams under compression are
dominated by flexure and that under tensile loading they are
controlled by flexure and stretching [37].
Although each of the currently presented models provide
valuable if not limited insight, these models are too
simplistic, often requiring the presence of perfect micro-
structure geometry. However, should various aspects of
the previously suggested models be considered alongside
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
 pss b
solidi
physica
status
12 R. Critchley et al.: Manufacture, mechanical properties and applications of auxetic foams
Figure 12 A finite element sample (2.2 mm3) of an auxetic foam of 45 PPI, demonstrating the response to tensile loading conditions,
undertaken at the University of Southampton.
imaging techniques such as computed tomography (CT), a
more accurate model could be produced. Unlike optical
microscopy and SEM, CT is capable of producing true 3-D
data, not only of the surface but throughout the volume of a
body. For auxetic foams this is extremely important, as the
auxetic ribs deform in three-dimensions. CT is capable of
analysing large samples, but the achievable resolution is
affected by both the area to be scanned and the type of
equipment employed. CT is a non-destructive technique and
therefore allows studying the changes in microstructure
under various experimental conditions. CT can also be
utilised in the application of finite element analysis, an area
rarely studied in current literature. An example of this work
can be seen in Fig. 12, where a real world auxetic foam
sample of 45 PPI at a volumetric compression ratio of
4.88 was scanned, meshed and analysed in an attempt to
understand localised rib movement under tensile loading
conditions, while investigating how a simulated response
corresponds to the model demonstrated in Fig. 13. Some
prelininary work using the CT technique has been reported
by Elliott et al. [53] and Gaspar et al. [54].
4.6 Models for metallic foams While the majority
of the research has been carried out on polymeric foams,
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
some authors have also studied or speculated the possible
deformation mechanisms in metallic foams. Friis et al. [2]
suggested, based on the ideal foam theory, that the main
deformation mechanism in copper foams would be plastic
hinging. Microscopy studies of re-entrant foam structures
demonstrated that plastic rib buckling was also present.
Successively, Choi and Lakes suggested that the behaviour
of polymeric and metallic foams is attributed to the ribs of the
material, with both materials experiencing re-entrant cellular
structures as a result of the auxetic conversion, resulting in
a 3-D auxetic behaviour [1, 3, 7]. It was further found for
copper foams that the ribs could form plastic hinges by
yielding at a relatively small strain, unlike polymeric foam
which are elastomer [36].
4.7 Granular mechanics Rothenburg et al. [44]
studied the behaviour of negative Poisson’s ratio by
assuming materials to be granular, for instance, consisting
of randomly packed smooth stiff spheres connected by
imaginary normal and tangential springs. Within this system,
the interactions occur through frictional interfaces, resist-
ance to compression (stiffness) and force transmission along
the axis of the connecting particles centres and tangential to
the plane of contact, as per real regular granular materials. By
www.pss-b.com
 Feature
Article

Phys. Status Solidi B (2013) 13

Figure 13 Diagram showing the key deformation mechanisms in conventional foam under compression and tension, (A) conventional
foam vertex and ribs, (B) forces acting on the ribs under compression, (C) deformation mechanism for each of the ribs during compression,
(D) forces acting on the ribs under tension, (E) deformation mechanism for each of the ribs during tension, where blue arrows represent
forces upon the ribs and dotted red lines represent previous positions of the ribs before force.

considering the material as a 2-D isotropic plane, the
Poisson’s ratio [Eq. (14)] is once more shown to be
controlled by the ratio between normal and tangential
stiffness,
1l
v¼ : (14)
4þl
Shufrin et al. [55] later explored the effects of negative
Poisson’s ratios in planar isotropic structures through
reference units (Fig. 14), each comprising of an infinitely
rigid hexagonal core surrounded by six linear elastic circular
frame arches of conventional Poisson’s ratio. By tailoring
the units through various frame and core shapes, internal
structures and bonding types, shear stiffness is once more
able to be greater than the normal stiffness resulting in
negative Poisson’s ratio.
Pasternak and Dyskin expanded the granular mechanics
approach to produce a 3-D granular system with the inclusion
of imaginary rotational elastic springs, where the ratio between
normal stiffness (kn) [N m1] to shear stiffness (ks) [N m1]
was again shown to be controlling parameter in determining
Poisson’s ratio [Eq. (15)] [56]. The inclusion of rotational
freedom failed to add any additional controlling parameters.
kn  ks
v¼ : (15)
4kn þ ks
Following this relationship, Pasternak and Dysken
proceeded to present two isotropic structures (ball link
model and thin shell model) capable of achieving a

www.pss-b.com ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

 pss b
solidi
physica
status
14 R. Critchley et al.: Manufacture, mechanical properties and applications of auxetic foams
Figure 14 Isotropic structural units: (a) clamped connection, (b)
semi-hinge connection and (c) hinge connection, adapted from
Shufrin et al. [55].
theoretical negative Poisson’s ratios of 1 (Figs. 15 and 16,
respectively) [56]. When tested the ball link model was
found to exhibit a Poisson’s ratio close to 1, whilst the thin
shells model only exhibited a Poisson’s ratio of 0.27. A
theoretical model was also suggested, in which sliding rods
are inserted into a crack to allow a sliding but restrict shear
displacement. This system however is difficult to implement
and thus has not been physically tested, although a
theoretical maximum negative Poisson’s ratio of 0.33
was suggested.
Figure 16 Thin shell model consisting of seven hollow balls glued together: (a) before loading and (b) bi-axial compression, adapted
from Pasternak and Dysken [56].
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Figure 15 Ball link unit model where (a) unloaded and (b) tensile
loaded, adapted from Pasternak and Dysken [56].
Interestingly Pasternak and Dyskin showed that as the
Poisson’s ratio of an isotropic material becomes closer to 1,
other mechanical properties will change depending upon if
the shear modulus or the Young’s modulus is fixed. In the
case of a fixed Young’s modulus, the tensile strength of a
material with a crack will increase indefinitely, whilst the
shear modulus will tend to infinity. Alternatively, fixing
the shear modulus will cause the Young’s modulus to tend to
zero and will decrease the tensile strength [56].
5 Mechanical properties of auxetic foams Under-
standing the mechanical properties of a material is funda-
mental to highlight its strengths and weaknesses and to
evaluate any possible application. It has been reported that
the conversion process of conventional polymeric and
metallic foams into auxetics enhances the mechanical
properties compared to the preliminary material. Many of
the observed improvements in mechanical properties are
directly linked to the change in the cellular structure and
the increase in density of the material due to the volumetric
compression ratio applied [1, 7, 37, 43]. The increase in
mechanical properties has been observed in both isotropic
and anisotropic materials and has been noticed to affect the
shear resistance [7, 8, 11, 24, 43, 44, 55–57] the indentation
www.pss-b.com

Phys. Status Solidi B (2013)
resistance [1, 2, 7, 11, 24, 26, 58–60], the fracture toughness
[1, 7, 9, 11, 24, 43, 61], the compression [2, 24], the shear
modulus [24, 43, 44, 55, 56], the stiffness [9, 10, 44, 55, 56],
acoustic dampening [1, 7, 43, 62, 63], the dynamic
performance [24], the optical passive turning of structural
vibration [64] and the viscoelastic loss [27, 65–67].
The improvements in mechanical properties observed
after the auxetic conversion have led numerous researchers to
consider many possible applications for auxetic foams
ranging from smart filtration systems to protective sports
equipment [1, 11]. The mechanical enhancements observed
are due to the changes to the four elastic constraints of the
material: Young’s modulus (E) [Pa], shear modulus (G) [Pa],
bulk modulus (K) [Pa] and Poisson’s ratio, which respectively
measure stiffness, rigidity, compressibility and volumetric
change under strain [11]. For these constraints there is not a
discernible characteristic length scale, which implies that a
microstructural dimensions smaller than 1 mm could exhibit
a negative Poisson’s ratio [3]. The following equations show
how the elastic constraints are related to each other and why
altering a constraint will affect the others [68]:
9KG
E¼ ; (16)
3K þ G
E 
G¼ ; (17)
2ð 1 þ v Þ
E where h is the mat thickness measured in mm and aw is the
K¼ ; (18)
3ð1  2vÞ
 
1 3K  2G
v¼ : (19)
2 3K þ G
These equations also provide understanding of the
property enhancements exhibited by auxetic materials. The
two main mechanical properties of auxetic foams studied in
the literature have been hardness (indentation) and toughness
(energy absorption), both properties are well-established as
the primary applications of the conventional foams are
packaging and cushioning [29].
5.1 Indentation of auxetic foams Lakes first
studied the effects of indentation on an auxetic foam by
assuming a localised pressure distribution, where the pressure
is proportional to (1  n2)/E, and from this expression it is
evident that for a material with a Poisson’s ratio close to 1
any indentation is very difficult [3, 69]. At the same time this
material becomes extremely compressible because the shear
modulus exceeds the bulk modulus. This behaviour is due to
the connection between the bulk modulus, the shear modulus
and the Poisson’s ratio through the equation:
2Gð1þvÞ
K¼ : (20)
ð1  2vÞ
Conversely, a material with a Poisson’s ratio approach-
ing 0.5, i.e. rubber, is incompressible because the bulk
www.pss-b.com
Feature
Article
15
modulus is greater than the shear modulus. In addition, Lakes
studied the effects of indention on a wrestling mat made
from elastomeric foams (n  1/3) [8]. He assumed that the
indentation could be described as indentation rigidity:
P E 
¼ 1  v2 ; (21)
w 2a
where a is the radius of a circular localised pressure [mm], P
the localised pressure [Pa] and w is the indentation depth
[mm], as described by Timoshenko and Goodier [69]. The
indentations experienced by the mat were further analysed
for small and large impacts [8]. For small impacts (narrow)
it was assumed that the circular pressure distribution could
be taken as an elastic half space yielding:
 
F Gan
¼ ; (22)
u narrow ð1  vÞ
where F is the indentation force [N], u and an are the
maximum displacement [mm] and the radius for narrow
indentation [mm], respectively. For impacts greater than the
mat thickness (wide), it is assumed that both compression
and force are uniformly distributed, with the Poisson’s ratio
effect controlled giving:
Ga2w
F 2hð1þvÞ
¼ ; (23)
u wide ð1  2vÞ
radius for wide indentation [mm].
From this study, Lakes suggested that the continuum
theory of elasticity was probably not the best approach to
describe the auxetic behaviour and proposed using the
Cosserat theory of elasticity that takes into account both
the maximum stresses and a natural length scale to allow
microstructural size to be incorporated into the prediction of
failure [8, 70, 71].
Subsequently, Evans and Alderson confirmed the theory
presented by Lakes treating the indentation as an effect of
uniform pressure distribution that for an isotropic material
can be described as proportional to [(1 – n2)/E]  1 (Fig. 17)
[11]. By applying the classic theory of elasticity, which states
that a material can have a Poisson’s ratio varying from 1 to
þ0.5, it can be seen that the indentation resistance increases
towards infinity for a negative Poisson’s ratio.
Furthermore, Evans and Alderson presented a relation-
ship to describe how the elastic constraints affect one another
with respect to the shear modulus (G) [11].
3K ð1  2vÞ
G¼ : (24)
2ð1þvÞ
In order to keep the same representation employed by
Lakes [Eq. (20)], this equation can be re-written in terms of
the bulk modulus (K) to give [3]:
2Gð1þvÞ
K¼ : (25)
3ð1  2vÞ
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
 pss b
solidi
physica
status
16 R. Critchley et al.: Manufacture, mechanical properties and applications of auxetic foams
Figure 17 Reaction of conventional and auxetic materials to loading under Hertzian indentation, adapted from Ref. [11].
In direct response to Lakes’ original paper [3], Burns
presented a relationship for the elastic constrains in term of
the bulk modulus [72], similar to that already given by Evans
and Alderson [Eq. (25)] [11]; however, the discrepancies
between the original work of Lakes [Eq. (20)] and the later
works published by other authors [Eq. (25)] should be noted
[11, 72]. Even if all the three sources employed the same
theory and treat the indentation as a uniform pressure
distribution, the equations obtained are different. When
the original literature is compared to the work of Evans,
Alderson and Burns, it can be seen that the uniform pressure
distribution only accounts for a negative Poisson’s ratio,
unlike in the later works, Poisson’s ratio could be either
positive or negative [3, 11, 72]. Furthermore, the equation
presented in the later literature is set to the power of 1, a
value unaccounted for in the original work [3, 11]. The
discrepancies continue when looking at the relationship
between the elastic constraints; with the work presented by
Lakes lacking of a 3 in the denominator, compared to the
equations reported by Burns and Evans and Alderson [3, 11,
72]. It is unknown why these discrepancies occurred, it is
possible that they could be the result of either an error within
the text or a failure to apply the correct concepts. Because of
these discrepancies found within the original literature the
work by Burns, Evans and Alderson and the equations that
they present should be considered to be correct.
5.2 Toughness Toughness is an important mechan-
ical property for a polymeric porous material since it
determines the maximum energy absorption of the foam
per unit, and can be determined by taking the integral of a
stress–strain curve, and applying the following equation:
Z ef
Energy
¼ sde; (26)
Volume 0 toughness by applying a methodology similar to that
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
where e and ef are the strain and the strain upon failure and s
is the stress [Pa].
In 1987 Lakes observed that the Poisson’s ratio affects
the toughness of the auxetic materials and that as the
Poisson’s ratio approaches 1, the material is expected to
become extremely tough [3]. Using the critical tensile stress:
pET
s¼ ; (27)
2r ð1  v2 Þ
where T is the surface tension [N m1] and r the circular
crack radius [mm], this behaviour can be explained [3, 8,
73]. Further to elastic constraints, the material toughness
and the Young’s modulus are also affected by both its non-
linear properties and structural aspects [43]. This initial
work was continued by Lakes and Choi who outlined the
differences between conventional and auxetic foams in
terms of material toughness; they observed that re-entrant
foams have an initial lower stiffness (Young’s modulus)
compared to conventional ones, but as a result of non-linear
behaviour during a large deformation, the energy density is
higher [29]. Furthermore, the energy absorption can be
increased by using conventional foams with higher
densities; this however is not always desirable as it results
in a higher stiffness [26, 29]. In order to understand the full
effect of energy absorption for auxetic and conventional
foams, Lakes and Choi studied the behaviour of foams
subjected to a range of volumetric compression ratios under
compressive and tensile stresses [29]. They found that the
material behaviour was substantially different for each of
the re-entrant specimens with toughness factors (1.7, 2.1,
2.3, 2.6 and 3.2) increasing with increasing volumetric
compression ratio (2.0, 2.6, 3.2, 3.7 and 4.2) [29].
Likewise, Choi and Lakes analysed the material
www.pss-b.com
 Feature
Article

Phys. Status Solidi B (2013) 17

described in to conventional and auxetic copper foams with

and without annealing.[36] For un-annealed auxetic foams
with volumetric compression ratios of 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 the
material toughness increased by factors of 1.4, 1.5 and 1.7
compared to conventional foams [29]. It was found that the
application of annealing could be used to influence the
overall toughness of the specimens however not always
positively. At a volumetric compression ratio of 2.0
annealing was found to improve the mechanical toughness
by 33%, whist annealed samples compressed to a factor of
2.5 gained a minimal increase in toughness. Once the
volumetric compression ratio reached a factor of 3.0 the
toughness decreased, a phenomenon that was not observed in
polymeric auxetic foams [36].
Alternatively to the single quasi-static loading method
undertaken by Choi and Lakes [29], Bezazi and Scarpa
studied the material toughness under quasi-static cyclic
loading via a fatigue test [9]. The auxetic foams exhibited
significantly higher stiffness degradation, energy absorption
and lower rigidity loss over a large number of cycles when
compared to their conventional counterparts. For N number
of cycles, the energy dissipated per unit volume (Ed) is
given by:
Z emax
Ed ¼ sdx; (28)
emin

where emin and emax are the minimum and maximum strain.
The graphical data reported in Fig. 18, where loading
levels (r), are defined as [74]:

Umax
r¼ ; (29)
Ur
where Umax and Ur are the maximum displacement at a
particular level and at failure (measured in mm), show
greater energy absorption for the hysteresis loops of the
auxetic foams, which with support of the stress–strain
curves of static testing demonstrates the increase in
resistance to failure and mechanical resilience. The
hysteresis cycle areas for both auxetic and conventional
foam increased with the load applied. On average auxetic
foams dissipate 2.4 times the amount of energy dissipated by
conventional foams for the first cycle under different
loadings. Furthermore, Bezazi and Scarpa stated that there
was different stiffness degradation behaviour for tension–
tension and compression–compression loading, although it
was found that the difference between each was not directly
linked to the energy absorption [9].
Bianchi et al. [4] continued to study the energy
dissipation during quasi-static and cyclic loading under
tension. They observed that when the negative Poisson’s
ratio approached zero the energy dissipation decreased.
Furthermore, this study demonstrated that there was no
significant statistical correlation between the various auxetic
sample batches analysed. Interestingly, Bianchi et al.
reported that during quasi-static cyclic tests, conventional
Figure 18 Load vs. displacement for different levels of loading for
(a) auxetic and (b) conventional foams, adapted from Ref. [9].
foams exhibit energy dissipation greater than that of auxetic
foams and deduced that the overall compression is the
controlling factor in the final Poisson’s ratio.
To further understand the mechanical properties of
auxetic foams, Bianchi et al. [5] studied how the energy
dissipation during both tension and compression is affected
when the foam is subjected to a four phase fabrication
process (as described in Section 2.1.1), as shown in Fig. 19.
An interesting observation was that the energy dissipation is
on average greater for second phase auxetics than for first
phase auxetics, although first phase auxetic experienced far
less scattering of the results. It was further observed, for both
tensional and compressive loading, that the conventional
phase demonstrate on average smaller energy dissipation
compared to the auxetic counterparts. However, the
conventional phases exhibited mechanical stiffness of up
to an order of magnitude higher when compared to the
auxetic phases [25, 27, 37, 60, 75].
In addition to quasi-static cyclic loading, Scarpa et al.
[10] have studied the energy absorption of conventional,
auxetic and iso-volumetric materials at different strain rates
under tensile loading. Strain rates of 8, 10 and 12 s1 and

www.pss-b.com ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

 pss b
solidi
physica
status
18 R. Critchley et al.: Manufacture, mechanical properties and applications of auxetic foams
Figure 19 Energy dissipation under (a) compression and (b) ten-
sion for as received (~), returned (), first auxetic (^) and second
auxetic (&) phases for polyurethane foam, adapted from Ref. [5].
instrument head displacements of 120, 150 and 180 mm s1,
respectively were applied to 19 mm diameter, 15 mm long
samples; the small sample size was employed to achieve the
desired strain rate. From the tests two main characteristics
were observed: (i) by increasing the tensile strain, the
Poisson’s ratio approaches zero and before becoming
positive; (ii) that enhancement to mechanical properties
under compression was not only the resultant of the increase
in density employed during fabrication of auxetic foams.
They also reported that for the auxetic samples tested the
mechanical properties, e.g. mechanical strength and stiff-
ness, were affected by the fabrication method and that the
auxetic foams had an order of magnitude increase compared
to the conventional foams.
Similar work was undertaken by Scarpa et al. [27] which
studied the energy absorption under higher strain rates,
where values of 15 and 38 s1 were employed comparable to
velocities of 1.5 and 3.8 m s1, respectively. They noticed
that during dynamic crushing the auxetic foams showed
a clear time-load history while the conventional foams
failed to demonstrate any form of loading resilience. This
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
behaviour can be associated with micro-inertia (an extension
of the classic continuum mechanics theory that includes
spatial gradients of acceleration to be considered into motion
equations) [76], localisation effects and strain rates affect the
dynamic crushing behaviour within the foams [2, 26, 27, 38].
Furthermore, the auxetic specimens were found to have a low
sensitivity to strains induced by stresses lower than 0.54 MPa
and once this value was exceeded the specimens exhibited
stiffening effects during the densification process.
6 Auxetic foam applications The enhancements in
mechanical properties offered by auxetic foams compared to
conventional foams have led several researchers to consider
possible applications for this new class of materials.
Currently conventional foams are utilised in applications
such as packaging, cushioning, air filtration, shock absorp-
tion and sound insulation [11, 26]. It could be anticipated that
in the future conventional foams will be replaced by auxetic
foams in many of these applications as a result of their
enhanced mechanical properties.
Further novel applications for the auxetic foam technol-
ogy have been suggested. Smart filtration systems allow
through the pores only particles with a certain size that could
be varied by varying the pore size of the foam by applying
different loads [11]. This application could be taken a step
further and be applied for smart drug delivery to patients.
In this case the amount of drugs delivered could be
controlled by whether or not the pores were opened or
closed and this could be influenced by the swelling of the
body and the consequent pressure exerted on the foam [15].
Another application of auxetic foam could result from their
characteristic double curvature reported by Lakes [3]. The
dome-like shape when the foam is bent could be applied to
mattresses to give support to the doubly curved human body
form [11].
Other notable uses for auxetic foams stem from military
applications where auxetic foams and other auxetic materials
are being studied for use in ballistic protection, for instance
Mitsubishi has recently patented a bullet design where
one component is made of auxetic material, in an attempt to
create an overall Poisson’s ratio of zero. By achieving a
negative Poisson’s ratio, lateral expansion would be reduced
when travelling down the gun barrel [11].
Another application proposed by Choi and Lakes is a
press fit fastener [7], which would work by tangentially
contracting when placed into a socket, and expanding when
attempted to be removed. An additional suggestion by Lakes
is linked to a wrestling mat that experiences both small
localised impacts (knees) and large distributed impacts
(human torso) during its use, which can be calculated
through Eqs. (19) and (20) [8]. Currently, wresting mats
contain elastomeric foams with Poisson’s ratio of approxi-
mately 0.3; however, Lakes proposes that due to the
enhanced indentation and energy distribution mechanisms
of negative Poisson’s ratio materials, auxetic foam would
offer the greatest performance, as opposed to rubber which is
considered to be not as effective.
www.pss-b.com

Phys. Status Solidi B (2013)
Other possible applications include structural integrity
structures [6, 10], sandwich components [1, 7, 10, 13, 64],
smart structures [11, 27], biomedical components [18, 77],
dynamic and multi-physics applications [26, 27, 78–81],
knee pads [1], tear resistant sponges [1] and sound absorbing
materials [1].
7 Summary
(i) Conventional polyurethane foam cells can be repre-
sented as pentagonal and hexagonal structures.
However, in reality the pores are slightly elongated
and not perfectly symmetrical.
(ii) Auxetic polyurethane foam cells can be represented as
either re-entrant cells or random rib structures.
(iii) Both 2-D and 3-D models have been proposed to
explain the auxetic behaviour. These models include:
the rigid triangle, honeycomb, missing rib and bow-tie
models. Although each of the models account for some
of the behaviours observed, no one of these models
alone can account for all behaviours observed and
therefore they should be considered together.
(iv) The auxetic fabrication requires a temperature equal or
greater than the softening temperature of the polymeric
material.
(v) A literature review indicates that an optimum heating
time for the process has not been identified yet and that
heating time ranging from 6 to 50 min has been
reported. This is likely due to the authors utilising
different equipment, materials and different sizes.
(vi) Failure to apply a correct volumetric compression ratio
will result in transitional samples, where both conven-
tional and auxetic cell units are present but without
presenting auxetic behaviour.
(vii) The optimum volumetric compression ratio is between
2 and 5 or between 50 and 80% of the original size.
(viii) Pore size has been found to be a secondary factor
influencing the auxetic behaviour whilst the cell
geometry is believed to be of primary influence.
(ix) Auxetic materials have been found to demonstrate
enhanced properties including mechanical hardness,
toughness, stiffness and dampening.
(x) There are a numerous potential applications for auxetic
samples including smart filters, biomedical apparatus,
protective sports clothing, packaging and numerous
other smart systems.
Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge
the financial support of EPSRC and Dstl (EP/G042195/1).
References
[1] R. Lakes, Nature 358, 713 (1992).
[2] E. A. Friis, R. Lakes, and J. B. Park, J. Mater. 23, 4406
(1988).
[3] R. Lakes, Science 235, 1038 (1986).
www.pss-b.com
Feature
Article
19
[4] M. Bianchi, F. L. Scarpa, and C. W. Smith, J. Mater. Sci. 43,
5851 (2008).
[5] M. Bianchi, F. Scarpa, and C. W. Smith, Acta Mater. 58, 858
(2010).
[6] K. E. Evans, Endeavour 15, 170 (1991).
[7] J. B. Choi and R. Lakes, Cell Polym. 10, 205 (1991).
[8] R. S. Lakes, J. Mech. Des. 115, 696 (1993).
[9] A. Bezazi and F. Scarpa, Int. J. Fatigue 31, 488 (2009).
[10] F. Scarpa, P. Pastorino, A. Farelli, S. Patsias, and A. Ruzzene,
Phys. Status Solidi B 242, 681 (2005).
[11] K. E. Evans and A. Alderson, Adv. Mater. 12, 617 (2000).
[12] N. Raviral, A. Alderson, and K. L. Alderson, J. Mater. Sci. 42,
7433, (2007).
[13] W. Yang, Z. M. Li, W. Shi, H. Xie, and M. B. Yang, J. Mater.
Sci. 39, 3269 (2004).
[14] A. Andersson, S. Lundmark, A. Magnusson, and F. H. J.
Maurer, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 111, 2290 (2009).
[15] P. J. Stott, R. Mitchell, K. L. Alderson, and A. Alderson,
Materials World 8, 12 (2000).
[16] A. E. H. Love, A Treatise on Mathematical Theory of
Elasticity (Dover Publisher, New York, 1927), p. 104.
[17] K. E. Evans and K. L. Alderson, Eng. Sci. Educ. J. 9, 148
(2000).
[18] G. E. Stavroulakis, Phys. Status Solidi B 242, 710 (2005).
[19] Q. Liu, Literature review: materials with negative Poisson’s
ratio and potential applications to aerospace and defence.
Defence Science and Technology Organisation, Victoria,
Australia (2006), p. 44.
[20] A. Alderson and K. L. Alderson, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng.,
Part G – J. Aerosp. Eng. 221, 565 (2007).
[21] Y. P. Liu and H. Hu, Sci. Res. Essays 5, 1052 (2010).
[22] A. Alderson, Soc. Chem. Ind. 24, 18 (2011).
[23] A. G. Kolpakov, J. Appl. Math. Mech. 49, 739 (1985).
[24] N. Chan and K. E. Evans, J. Mater. Sci. 32, 5945 (1997).
[25] C. W. Smith, J. N. Grima, and K. E. Evans, Acta Mater. 48,
4349 (2000).
[26] F. Scarpa, J. R. Yates, L. G. Ciffo, and S. Patsias, Proc. Inst.
Mech. Eng. C 216, 1153 (2002).
[27] F. Scarpa, L. G. Ciffo, and J. R. Yates, Smart Mater. Struct.
13, 49 (2004).
[28] M. Bianchi, F. Scarpa, C. W. Smith, and G. R. Whittell,
J. Mater. Sci. 45, 341 (2010).
[29] J. B. Choi, and R. S. Lakes, J. Mater. Sci. 27, 4678 (1992).
[30] S. A. McDonald, N. Ravirala, P. J. Withers, and A. Alderson,
Scr. Mater. 60, 232 (2009).
[31] F. Cadamagnani, S. Frontoni, M. Bianchi, and F. Scarpa,
Phys. Status Solidi B 246, 2118 (2009).
[32] Y. C. Wang, R. Lakes, and A. Butenhoff, Cell Polym. 20, 373
(2001).
[33] J. N. Grima, D. Attard, R. Gatt, and R. N. Cassar, Adv. Eng.
Mater. 11, 533 (2009).
[34] M. Bianchi, F. Scarpa, M. Banse, and C. W. Smith, Acta
Mater. 59, 686 (2011).
[35] M. Bianchi, S. Frontoni, F. Scarpa, and C. W. Smith, Phys.
Status Solidi B 248, 30 (2011).
[36] J. B. Choi and R. Lakes, J. Mater. Sci. 27, 5375 (1992).
[37] N. Chan and K. Evans, J. Mater. Sci. 32, 5725 (1997).
[38] L. J. Gibson and M. F. Ashby, Cellular Solids: Structure
and Properties (Cambridge University Press, London,
1988).
[39] N. Mills, Polymer Foams Handbook (Butterworth Heinemann,
2007), p. 535
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
 pss b
solidi
physica
status
20 R. Critchley et al.: Manufacture, mechanical properties and applications of auxetic foams
[40] K. E. Evans, M. A. Nkansah, I. J. Hutchinson, and S. C.
Rogers, Nature 353, 124 (1991).
[41] A. Alderson, J. Rasburn, and K. E. Evans, Phys. Status Solidi
B 244, 817 (2007).
[42] J. N. Grima, R. Gatt, N. Ravirala, A. Alderson, and K. E.
Evans, Mater. Sci. Eng. 423, 214 (2006).
[43] R. Lakes, J. Mater. Sci. 26, 2287 (1991).
[44] L. Rothenburg, A. I. Berlin, and R. J. Bathurst, Nature 354,
470 (1991).
[45] J. B. Choi and R. Lakes, J. Compos. Mater. 29, 113 (1995).
[46] I. G. Masters and K. E. Evans, Compos. Struct. 35, 403 (1996).
[47] J. M. Berthelot, J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 7, 284 (1988).
[48] J. B. Choi and R. Lakes, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 37, 51 (1995).
[49] K. E. Evans, M. A. Nkansah, and I. J. Hutchinson, Acta
Metall. Mater. 42, 1289 (1994).
[50] F. R. Attenborough, The modelling of network polymers.
PhD thesis, University of Liverpool, Liverpool (1997).
[51] C. P. Chen and R. S. Lakes, Cell Polym. 14, 186 (1995).
[52] H. X. Zhu, J. F. Knott, and N. J. Mills, J. Mech. Phys. Solids
45, 319 (1997).
[53] J. A. Elliott, A. H. Windle, J. R. Hobdell, G. Eeckhaut, R. J.
Oldman, W. Ludwig, E. Boller, P. Cloetens, and J. Baruchel,
J. Mater. Sci. 37, 1547 (2002).
[54] N. Gaspar, C. W. Smith, E. A. Miller, G. T. Seidler, and K. E.
Evans, Phys. Status Solidi B 242, 550 (2005).
[55] I. Shufrin, E. Pasternak, and A. V. Dyskin, Int. J. Solids
Struct. 49, 2239 (2012).
[56] E. Pasternak and A. V. Dyskin, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 52, 103 (2012).
[57] F. Scarpa and P. J. Tomlin, Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct.
23, 717 (2000).
[58] A. Alderson, Chem. Ind. 384, (1999).
[59] R. Lakes and K. Elms, J. Compos. Mater. 27, 1193 (1993).
[60] C. W. Smith, F. Lehman, R. J. Wootton, and K. E. Evans, Cell
Polym. 18, 79 (1999).
ß 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
[61] A. Bezazi and F. Scarpa, Int. J. Fatigue 29, 922 (2007).
[62] F. Scarpa, W. A. Bullough, and P. Lumley, J. Mech. Eng. Sci.
218, 241 (2004).
[63] F. Scarpa and F. C. Smith, J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 15,
973 (2004).
[64] F. Scarpa and G. Tomlinson, J. Sound Vib. 230, 45 (2000).
[65] C. P. Chen and R. Lakes, Cell Polym. 8, 343 (1989).
[66] R. Lakes, Cell Polym. 10, 466 (1991).
[67] C. P. Chen and R. Lakes, J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 118, 285
(1996).
[68] F. A. McClintock and A. S. Argon, Mechanical Behaviour
of Materials (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts,
1966).
[69] S. P. Timoshenko and J. N. Goodier, Theory of Elasticity
(McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1970).
[70] R. D. Mindlin, Int. J. Solids Struct. 1, 265 (1965).
[71] R. Lakes, Int. J. Solids Struct. 22, 55 (1986).
[72] S. Burns, Science 238, 551 (1987).
[73] I. N. Sneddon, Fourier Transforms (McGraw-Hill, New York,
1951).
[74] A. R. Bezazi, A. El Mahi, J. M. Berthelot, and B. Bezzazi,
Strength Mater. 35, 149 (2003).
[75] N. Chan and K. E. Evans, J. Cell. Plast. 35, 130 (1999).
[76] H. Askes, D. Nguyen, and A. Tyas, Comput. Mech. 47, 657–
667 (2011).
[77] B. D. Caddock and K. E. Evans, Biomaterials 35, 130 (1995).
[78] M. Ruzzene and F. Scarpa, J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 14,
443 (2003).
[79] F. Scarpa, F. C. Smith, B. Chambers, and G. Burriesci,
Aeronaut. J. 107, 175 (2003).
[80] F. C. Smith and F. Scarpa, IEE Proc. Sci. Meas. Technol. 151,
9 (2004).
[81] J. P. M. Whitty, A. Alderson, P. Myler, and B. Kandola,
Composites A 34, 525 (2003).
www.pss-b.com