SANDWICH CONSTRUCTION 12

Andrew C. Marshall

12.1 INTRODUCTION 1. a pair of thin, strong facings;

2. a thick, lightweight core to separate the fac-
This chapter covers a unique form of com-
ings and carry loads from one facing to the
posites known as ’structural sandwich
other; and
construction’.
3. an attachment which is capable of transmit-
A structural sandwich consists of three ele-
ting shear and axial loads to and from the
ments, as shown in Fig. 12.1:
core.
I This chapter provides a general background
and a brief summary of the various materials
in common use; the design steps used to cal-
culate loads; some design details for solving
load point, edging and attachment problems;
and a few tables, charts and graphs containing
useful information for the designer. An
attempt is also made throughout the chapter
to provide suggestions and perspectives to
help a new user of sandwich structures tech-
nology to avoid some of the errors of his
predecessors.
Structural sandwich construction is one of
the first forms of composite structures to have
attained broad acceptance and usage. Virtually
all commercial airliners and helicopters and
Fig. 12.1 The elements of a sandwich structure are nearly all military air and space vehicles make
as follows: (a) two rigid, thin, high strength facings; extensive usage of sandwich construction. In
(b) one thick, low density core; and (c) an adhesive recent years, most commercial space vehicles
attachment which forces the core and facings to act
as a continuous structure.The facings of a sandwich have also adopted this technology for many
panel act similarly to the flanges of an I-beam, components. The effectiveness of sandwich
resisting the bending loads and increasing the construction is shown in Fig. 12.2.
bending stiffness of the structure by spreading the In addition to air and space vehicles, the sys-
facings apart. However, unlike the I-beam’s web, tem is commonly used in the manufacture of
the core gives continuous support to the flanges or cargo containers, relocatable shelters and air-
facings. field surfacing, navy ship interiors, small boats
and yachts, duplicate die models and produc-
Handbook of Composites. Edited by S.T. Peters. Published tion parts in the automobile and recreational
in 1998 by Chapman & Hall, London. ISBN 0 412 54020 7

Fig. 12.2 A striking example of how conversion to sandwich stiffens a structure without materially increas-
ing its weight. This example uses 1.6 mm (0.063 in) thick aluminum facings and 1/4-5052 37 kg/m7 (2.3
lb/fPj aluminum core.
vehicle industry, snow skis, display cases, resi-
dential construction materials, interior
partitions, doors, cabinets and a great many
other everyday items.
Although the employment of sandwich
design to produce lightweight or special pur-
pose load-carrying members is thought to
have originated as early as 1820, routine com-
mercial use of the idea did not occur until
about 110 years later. What started this sudden
acceptance was the successful commercial pro-
duction of structural adhesives, starting in
both UK and USA in the 1920s and 1930s.
This early production began with the use of
casein glue and later urea-formaldehyde and
phenolics, with wood facings and cores. The
search for better adhesives subsequently
resulted in the development of the rubber-
phenolics and the vinyl-phenolics, which were
suitable for use with metals. Commercial
adhesives such as ’Cycleweld,’ (from Chrysler
Motors), ’Plycosite,’ (from US Plywood) and
’Redux’ (from Bonded Structures, in Duxford,
UK) adhered well to both wood and metals
and possessed rather high and predictable
strength.
The result was the beginning of a revolution
in bonding technology. Many further develop-
ments followed in only a few years. They
included improved cleaning methods for
metal skins; low weight, high strength/stiff-
ness honeycomb core materials; ‘B’ staged
tape adhesives which could be stored for long
times; glass fabrics and collimated tapes
preimpregnated with accurately measured
Fncing material 255
amounts of ’B’ staged resins; high strength
resins; tough, high peel adhesives requiring
lower cure temperatures and pressures; as
well as the discovery of the resistance of sand-
wich to sonic fatigue.
12.2 FACING MATERIAL
The primary function of the face sheets in a
sandwich structure is to provide the required
bending and in-plane shear stiffness and to
carry the edgewise and bending loads, as well
as the in-plane shear loading. In the aerospace
field, facings most commonly chosen are resin
impregnated fiberglass cloth or a laminate of
unidirectional fibers (commonly called
’prepreg’), graphite prepreg, 2024 or 7075 alu-
minum alloy, titanium alloy, or any of several
stainless steel or refractory metal alloys. Even
the most economical of these products repre-
sents a substantial cost and customary practice
is to choose among them very carefully on a
value engineering, or lowest lifetime cost,
basis.
12.2.1 SUITABILITY OF MATERIALS
When choosing facing materials (as well as the
core, adhesive, or other materials) for an appli-
cation, it is wise to examine the less obvious
properties of the material, such as toughness
or brittleness, mode of fracture, durability and
weatherability, compatibility with rivets and
bolts and other such attributes which may
directly affect the usability or success of the
256 Sandwich construction
end product, even though not directly
involved in stress analysis or weight savings.
An understanding of these requirements has
resulted in a switch from aluminum to fiber-
glass skins and from fiberglass to aramid
(Nomex, from DuPont) cores for most aircraft
cabin interior panels.
12.3 CORE MATERIALS
The primary function of a core in sandwich
structures is that of stabilizing the facings and
carrying most of the shear loads through the
thickness. In order to perform this job effi-
ciently, the core must be as rigid and as light as
possible and must deliver uniformly pre-
dictable properties in the environment (such
as high humidity) in which the finished part is
to perform.
12.3.1 TYPES OF CORE MATERIALS
Wood
Several different materials are used exten-
sively as sandwich cores. The oldest of these is
wood, which continues to be used in many
applications as a core for such common appli-
cations as doors, partitions and many other
’builder’s supply’ items. It is also used in the
majority of snow skis, either flat-grain or end-
grain, although a few of the higher
performance skis employ honeycomb, foam,
or reinforced plastic cores. End-grain balsa has
broad acceptance in boat hulls up to lengths of
15.2m (50 ft) or more and is still used for
replacement flooring for many older and a few
new aircraft.
The traditional advantage of the low cost of
wood has been progressively eroded with the
passage of time and many users report diffi-
culty in supply, even at prices higher than foam
and sometimes approaching that of honey-
comb. Even so, the ease of use and excellent
durability of the end product has led to sub-
stantially increased usage, particularly of the
carefully selected grades of end-grain balsa, in
applications such as boat hulls, large tanks and
airborne pallets and containers. This broaden-
ing usage is also prompted by its excellent
compressive strength and modulus properties
when compared to all but the aramid paper
honeycombs, which are much more expensive.
Complete information can be obtained from
the leading producer of these materials,
BaltekI3,or Balsa Ecuador Lumber Company.
Foam
The use of foam as a structural core has been
and is now, extensive. Recent developments in
the technology of foam injection have sharply
increased the use of these materials. The most
novel of these is use of a cold-cavity die, in
which the foam is injection molded in a single
production step. A careful adjustment of the
mixing and curing reaction of the foam,
together with the heat-sink effect of the mold
results in a part with facings which are simply
an un-foamed, higher density form of the
same polymer which constitutes the foamed
core. The high productivity and modest cost of
this scheme have resulted in many applica-
tions in the automotive and industrial fields.
Another fast-growing form of the material is
in cores for fiberglass snow skis and tennis
rackets, in which an assembly of facings and
close-out details is placed in a closed cavity
mold and foam injected to form both the core
and the adhesive attachment to the pre-cured
glass fiber skins and various edge details. The
saving in labor over conventional assembly
methods has resulted in rapid acceptance of
the process and the construction of many new
factories.
Foams can also provide special properties
such as insulation or radar transparency, when
used with appropriate facing materials.
The very low cost polystyrene foams are
used primarily in non-sandwich applications,
their role in structural parts for refrigerated
vehicles and buildings having been largely
taken over by the urethanes. The single major

exception to this statement lies in the extensive
use of polystyrene foams as cores in several
thousand amateur-built composite aircraft.
This application was pioneered by Burt Rutan,
in his ’moldless construction’, used in his
series of high performance small aircraft and
the many similar designs offered by others in
subsequent years.
The polyvinyl chloride (PVC) foams, which
made an impact on the transport aircraft
industry as flooring cores, have been largely
replaced by the more efficient high density
aramid honeycombs.
The foam-in-place system of producing
sandwich structures has been used for more
than 35 years, because of its simple concept.
However, users of this system have always
had difficulty with the continuing problem of
producing uniform properties from one mix to
the next and in achieving uniformly high core
and bond strengths to the metal or pre-cured
glass fiber skins. The use of systematic incom-
ing inspection, automatic mixing and
dispensing equipment and, in the case of criti-
cal airframe parts, test coupons, produced
integrally with the basic part, have all helped
to keep the problems under control.
It will be noted that Table 12.1 does not list
the shear strength of many of the various
Roll
HOBE Block HOBE Slice
Expanded Panel
Expansion Process of Honeycomb Manufacture
Corrugated Sheet
Roll Corrugating Rolls
Corrugation Process of
Honeycomb Manufacture
Cove materials 257
foams, even though this value is needed for
sandwich panel design. This property, even
where listed, cannot be considered to be a reli-
able value. The actual value for an application
at hand must be determined for the actual
materials and conditions of use in order to be
considered reliable. When a value for shear
strength is not available, it may be roughly
estimated to be about 0.7 times the compres-
sive strength shown. Even the compressive
strength cannot be considered to be reliable,
however, as many differing methods of mea-
suring this value are commonly used and each
results in a substantially different value
reported.
12.3.2 HONEYCOMB
Honeycomb types in common usage include
products made from uncoated and resin-
impregnated kraft paper, various aluminum
alloys, aramid paper and glass or carbon fiber
reinforced plastic in a number of cloth weaves
and resin systems. Honeycombs based on tita-
nium, stainless steel and many others are used
in lesser quantities. Most honeycomb cores are
constructed by adhesively bonding strips of
thin material together, as shown in Fig. 12.3.
In the case of aramid paper honeycomb, the
c T r
+
I
Corrugated Block
Fig. 12.3 Most honeycomb is
produced by the expansion
process. Actual cell shape
produced by either method
may vary greatly.
258 Sandwich construction

Table 12.1 Properties of several foam materials used as cores*

TYP Compressive
Tensile strength Maximum
strength at 10% deflection service
Density (ASTM 01623) (ASTM 01621) temperature
lb/ft3 kg/m3 psi MPa psi MPa "F "C
ABS
(acrylonitrile
bu tadiene-styrene)
Injection molding
type pellets 40-56 641-897 20004000 13.8-27.6 2300-3700 15.8-25.5 176-180 80-82
Cellulois acetate
Boards and rods
(rigid, closed
cell foam) 6.0-8.0 96-128 170 1.2 125 0.86 350 177
Epoxies
Rigid closed cell, 5.0 80 51 0.35 90 0.62 350 177
precast blocks, 10.0 160 180 1.2 260 1.8 350 177
slabs, sheet 20.0 320 650 4.5 1080 7.4 350 177
Phenolics
Foam-in-phase 'X-1% 5-24 3-17 0.021-0.12 2-15 0.014-0.10
liquid resin 2-5 32-80 20-54 0.1384.372 22-85 0.15-0.58 Continuous
7-10 112-160 80-130 0.552-0.896 158-300 1.09-2.07 service at 145
300
Polypropylene
Pellets 50 801 5500 37.9 7500 51.7 270 132
Polypropylene" 35.0 561 1600 11.03 2100 14.4
Polyurethaneb 1.3-3.0 2148 15-96 0.104.65 15-60 0.10-0.41 180-250 82-121
4-8 64-128 90-290 0.62-1.99 70-275 0.48-1.90 200-250 93-131
9-12 144192 230450 1.58-3.10 290-550 1.99-3.79 250-275 121-135
13-18 208-288 475-700 3.284.83 650-1100 4.48-7.58 250-300 121-149
19-25 30p400 775-1300 5.34-8.96 1200-2000 8.27-13.8 250-300 121-149
Skinned molded
(rigid)
Skin 25-65 400-1041 100-2700 0.68-18.6 40-3000 0.28-20.7 150-250 66-121
Core 3-30 48481 15-1500 15-1500 150-250 66-121
Polyvinyl chloride
Rigid closed cell 3 48 1000 6.90 95 0.65
andup andup
boards and billets 6 96 200 1.38
* Where shear strength and modulus properties are not shown, use a figure of 0.7 times the compressive strength shown
as a first approximation for design feasibility consideration. Always test actual material used for true value of shear
strength and modulus.
a High density, foam, molded, parts and shapes, with solid, integral skin.

Rigid (closed cell) molded parts; boards, blocks, slabs; pipe covering; one-shot, two- and three-package systems for
foam-in-place;for spray, pour, or froth-pour techniques.
 Core materials 259

Table 12.1 Continued

Type Thermal
conductivity Shear Shear
strength modulus
BTU in
h-'Pf2 Wm-' K-I psi MPa psi MPa
~ _ _
ABS
(acrylonitrile
butadiene-styrene)
Injection molding
type pellets 0.58-2.1 0.08-0.30
Cellulose acetate
Boards and rods
(rigid, closed
cell foam) 0.31 0.04
Epoxies
Rigid closed cell, 0.26 0.04
precast blocks, 0.28 0.04
slabs, sheet 0.32 0.05
Phenolics
Foam-in-phase 0.2 1-0.28 0.03-0.04
liquid resin 0.20-0.22 0.03-0.04
0.24-0.28 0.03-0.04
Polypropylene
Pellets 1.05 0.15
Polypropylene" 4.2 0.61
Polyurethaneb 0.11-0.21 0.2-0.4 20 0.14 226 1.56
0.15-0.29 0.02-0.04 90 0.62 1500 10.3
0.19-0.35 0.03-0.05 180 1.24 4500 31.0
0.26-0.40 0.04-0.06
0.34-0.52 0.05-0.07 450 3.1 15000 103.5
Skinned molded
(rigid)
Skin 0.12-0.80 0.02-0.12
Core 0.21-0.55 20-500 225-15 000
Polyvinyl chloride
Rigid closed cell 2.0 at 70 65 0.45 1200 8.3
boards and billets 120 0.83 2200 15.2
* Where shear strength and modulus properties are not shown, use a figure of 0.7 times the compressive strength shown
as a first approximation for design feasibility consideration. Always test actual material used for true value of shear
strength and modulus.
a High density, foam, molded, parts and shapes, with solid, integral skin.
Rigid (closed cell) molded parts; boards, blocks, slabs; pipe covering; one-shot, two- and three-package systems for
foam-in-place; for spray, pour, or froth-pour techniques.
260 Sandwich construction

inherent toughness and abuse resistance of the enced by the properties of the materials from
material makes cores of 1 6 4 8 k g / m 3 (1-3 which they are manufactured. Some of these
lb/ft3) an excellent choice for aircraft cabin differences are obvious in the thermal conduc-
interior walls and ceilings, even with glass fab- tivity information shown in Fig. 12.4 and Fig.
ric-reinforced skins as low as 0.254 mm (0.010 12.5. However, several significant properties
in) in thickness. of honeycomb cores are peculiar to the materi-
Physical and mechanical properties of the als and should be separately noted.
honeycomb core materials are strongly influ-

Thermal Resistance - Aluminum Honeycomb

.028
N

E13021
W
P-=x
&j.014
w
0)
U
007

(4 0
25(1 0) 5 0 (20) 76(30 lO(40)
Core Thickness- cm (in )

Fig. 12.4 Thermal conductivity Thermal Resistance-Non Metallic Honevcomb

70 4
through sandwich panels can be
isolated into the contribution of cu
each component: facings, core $13 53 3
W
and adhesive. The resistances (or 9
reciprocal of conductivity) can 2 35 2
simply be added - including the e
PI
effect of boundary layer condi- U
18 1
tions. The thermal properties of
typical facing materials may be
found in many handbooks.
1 3 (05) 25(10) 3 8(1 5) 5 0 (20 )
Thermal resistance values for Core Thickness- cm (in )
typical core to facing adhesives
are typically 0.03 for film adhe-
sives with a scrim cloth support Effect of Mean TemDerature
and 0.01 for unsupported adhe-
sives. These graphs give the
resistance for aluminum and
non-metallic honeycomb at a
mean temperature of 23.9"C
(75°F). Note that for non-metallic
honeycomb, it has been found
that the cell size is more critical
than core density. The reverse is
true with aluminum honeycomb.
To correct for mean temperature, -1 29 -17.8 93 204
divide the resistance at 23.9"C
(75°F) by coefficient Q.
 Core materials 261

1.2 , I I I I I I I I
1.1

1.o
Y
a .9
8
4:
Y
.e
.7
5
F .6
8 .5
0
0 .4
I 1 I I I
I
I I

Fig. 12.5 Measured core shear strength will vary

1 125 L E KRAFT PAPER,
PHENOLIC RESIN,
1
depending upon the test method, core thickness, & " I N C H XEXAGON CELLS
3003 - H I 9 ALUMINUM
skin thickness and many other factors. The above
curves may be used only for preliminary correction
factors. Physical tests of the final design must be (bl 0
I' I
I
00024 -INCH FOIL
;':INCH

2
I
HEXAGON' C E L L S

3
I I
4
used to confirm actual values obtained, as the CORE THICKNESS (INCHES J

curves shown above are only approximate.

Density
All mechanical properties increase with higher
density, as shown in Fig. 12.6.
Cell shape
All honeycombs are anisotropic and the result-
ing directional properties should be adapted to
the loads anticipated. Figure 12.7shows typical
differences in shear strength for the L and W
directions. In addition, some cell shapes allow
easy forming or curving at a small loss in
strength/weight ratio. This attribute can be of
great importance in manufacturing curved
parts of appreciable thickness.

Fig. 12.6(a) Typical stabilized

compressive strengths.
262 Sandwich construction
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Density
Fig. 12.7 Plate shear test values may be signifi-
cantly different from test results obtained from
testing beams. Values shown above are typical for
5052 aluminum honeycomb.
Cell shape variations
Cell shape variations may be either furnished
to specification by the core manufacturer, or, in
certain materials such as aluminum, shapes
may be intentionally or inadvertently altered
by the core user. It should be noted that the
under- or over-expansion of the core changes
its cell shape and density. The over-expanded
version of Fig. 12.8(c) changes directional
properties such that the L direction becomes
slightly the weaker of the two major axes.
1 PCF
I L Fig. 12.6(b) Typical 'L' shear
140 160kglm'
strengths.
C D
E F
G H
Fig. 12.8 A few of the many cell configurations in
common usage. 8, G and H are only produced by
the corrugating method. F is a cell configuration
nearly always used in the manufacture of welded
metal honeycomb. C is flexible in one axis, while G
and H are flexible in both axes. A, C and D are
expanded from identical unexpanded slices, A
being normal expansion, C fully over-expanded
and D 50% expanded. B is a reinforced corrugated
core, with an extra layer of uncorrugated web mate-
rial placed between each layer of corrugated web
material. Reinforcing layers may be added in dis-
crete locations or patterns and may be of the same
or different web material or thickness.
 Core materials 263

Since the drop in the L direction strength can

amount to as much as 30%, such changes in
cell shape must not be allowed to occur by
error.

Cell size
Although cell size tends to be a secondary
variable for most mechanical properties of
core materials, it is primary in fixing the
strength level of the core-to-face attachment
(or, more accurately, in fixing the required
lower limit on core-to-panel adhesive weight)
and in determining stress levels at which
intracell buckling or face dimpling of facings
occurs.

Thickness v :
The shear and compressive properties noted
Fig. 12.9 Plate shear test for honeycomb shear
for a 'pecific 'Ore type can Only be strength and modulus 1.27 cm (0.50 in) thick steel
when test methods are 'Pecified and plates are oven-cleaned and may be reused many
controlled and the correct thickness of core is times.
tested. Failure to allow for the effect of thick-
ness can affect observed values by a factor of 4
or more, as noted in Fig. 12.5. It should be
emphasized that the correction factor shown
may be considerably different, depending on
skin material and thickness, as well as the
exact test method used.

Specimen geometry and test method

Like thickness, these must be specified and
carefully controlled in order to obtain compa-
rability -with test values obtained by others.
Shear strength values obtained using plate Fig. l2*l0 Short beam shear test for
core. Note the ample bearing area provided at each
shear test methods of Fig. 12.9 are quite nor-
load and support point to preclude core crushing
mally up to 25% below those obtained when prior to ,-hear failure.
using the flexure method shown in Fig. 12.10.
Both methods are accepted and used and any
lack of understanding of the differences can
Paper honeycomb
lead to monumental, if nonsensical, problems.
It will be noted that the tables of mechanical Paper honeycomb is the first predecessor of all
properties for various honeycombs, Tables the types of honeycomb, having been pro-
12.4-12.12, specify the shear test method used duced for some 2000 years. Early forms were
in producing the data shown. not used as structural cores, but were
264 Sandwich constructiotz
Core materials 265
266 Sandwich construction
m
n
. -
 Core materials 267
x x x x
0000
\ \ \ \
yE z2 z2 z2 z2 a,
6 3
L
268 Sandwich construction
employed as decoration - and are still fre-
quently seen today as seasonal decorations in
department stores in the form of expanded
bells, spheres and so forth.
Current materials used as sandwich cores
are different, in that much stronger kraft paper
is employed and 11-35% phenolic resin is fre-
quently used to improve mechanical
properties, as well as moisture and fungus
resistance. Many variations are available in
cell sizes of 10,13 and 19 mm (%, X and % in) or
even larger sizes. The higher strength versions
are only produced in the smaller cell size, with
the 10mm (% in) cell available as a water-
migration resistant grade meeting military
specification MIL-H-2104Q.
Most applications are found in non-aircraft
uses, where cost saving is the one primary
objective. Usage is growing rapidly in recre-
ational vehicles; for doors, walls and
partitions; for factory produced kitchen cabi-
nets; in packaged patio room additions for
homes; in curtain wall panels; and in bearing
walls for commercial building.
Aluminum honeycomb
This family of materials has been in produc-
tion and growing since about 1947.Aluminum
honeycomb now includes four alloys, at least
five cell shapes and many foil gauges to pro-
vide a range of densities. The alloys generally
available are:
0 3003-H19, the lowest strength of the group,
usually used for non-aircraft applications;
0 5052-H39, the most often used aircraft
grade, available with a corrosion resistant
surface treatment. Mechanical properties
are listed in Table 12.2;
0 5056-H39, the strongest of the regular air-
craft grades, available with a corrosion
resistant surface treatment;
0 2024-T3 or T81, the most heat-resistant alloy
and slightly stronger in some properties
than 5056-H39. Available with a corrosion
resistant surface treatment.
Some of the above alloys are also available as
corrugated, corrugated and reinforced, over-
expanded and flexible cell configurations.
Some have also been produced in a specially
tailored geometry to make all the cell axes lie
on a true radius of a cylinder, a sphere, or
other unique configurations. These same alloy
foils can also be wound as a corrugated spiral
to form a cylinder or tube for very light energy
absorption applications.
The aluminum honeycomb cores remain
the most used, as well as the most versatile of
the various core materials obtainable and are
often found to possess the most favorable per-
formance/cost ratio available. Expanded
aluminum cores commercially available
ranges from a low of about 32 kg/m3 (2 lb/ft3)
to a high of 192kg/m3 (12.0Ib/ft").
Corrugated aluminum cores, however, start at
under 128kg/m3 (81b/ft3) and can be pur-
chased up to 880 kg/m3 (55 lb/ft3). At
densities below 128 kg/m3 (8 lb/ft3) corru-
gated core suffers a serious penalty in shear
properties when compared to expanded core.
Glass fiber-reinforced plastic honeycomb
This family of materials is most commonly
used in electrically sensitive parts, such as
radomes and antennae, or where a heat resis-
tant resin and low thermal conductivity make
it a natural choice. It has also seen distin-
guished service as a matrix for retaining
non-structural ablative materials, such as soft
silicone rubbers or syntactic rigid epoxy
foams, which otherwise could not have been
used effectively as ablative heat shields on the
Gemini and Apollo re-entry vehicles.
Only high temperature phenolic and poly-
imide cores are generally produced. They are
commonly available in cell sizes of 5, 6.3 and
10 mm (K, X and X in) with a 3 mm (% in) cell
available in a bias weave glass reinforcement.
Densities range from 32 to 192 kg/m" (2 to 12
lb/ft3). Mechanical properties of several com-
mercially available glass fiber-reinforced cores
are shown in Tables 12.3-12.6.
 Core materials 269

Table 12.4(a) Properties of glass-reinforced phenolic honeycomb (bias weave reinforcement)*

Conipressiue Plate shear

-~_____. ~~- -.--_____ -. ~

Bare Stabilized 'L' Direction 'W' Direction

Honeycomb
~

__
designation Strength, Strength, Modulus, Strength, Modulus, Strength, Modulus,
material - cell - density__ psi psi ksi psi ksi psi ksi
typical typical typical typical typical typical typical
HFT - 1/8 - 3.0 300p 350p 22p 185p 17P 95P 7P
HFT - 1 / 8 - 4.0 390p 575p 45p 300p 32P 150p 12p
HFT - 1 / 8 - 5.5 52533 960p 67p 425p 42P 225p 17p
HFT - 1/8 - 8.0 1450p 1625p 1OOp 575p 48P 340p 25p
HFT - 3/16 - 1.8 75P 120p 14p 105p 13P 5% 4P
HFT - 3/16 - 2.0 loop 170p 17p 115p 15P 6OP 5P
HFT - 3/16 - 3.0 27513 375p 32p 200p 24P loop 9P
HFT - 3/16 - 4.0 435p 550p 45p 275p 3% 140p 12p
HFT/OX - 3/16 - 6.0 lOOOp 11OOp 67p 290p 13P 335p 30p
* Test data obtained at 0.500 in thickness. Honeycomb is normally not tested for bare compressive strength.

Table 12.4(b) Properties of glass-reinforced phenolic honeycomb (bias weave reinforcement)*(metric)

Compressive Plate shear

~ _~-
_ _____

Bare Stabilized 'L' Direction 'W' Direction

Honeycomb
designation Strength, Strength, Modulus, Strength, Modulus, Strength, Modulus,
material - cell - density kPa kPa MPa kPa MPa kPa MPa
typical typical typical typical typical typical typical
HFT - 1 / 8 - 3.0 2068p 2413p 151p 1275p 117p 655p 48P
HFT-1/8-4.0 2688p 396413 310p 206813 220p 1034p 82P
HFT - 1 / 8 - 5.5 3619p 6618p 461p 2930p 289p 1551p 117p
HFT - 1 / 8 - 8.0 9997p 11203p 689p 3964p 331p 2344 172p
HFT - 3/16 - 1.8 517p 827p 97P 724p 89P 344p 27P
HFT - 3/16 - 2.0 689p 1172p 117p 792p 103p 413p 34P
HFT - 3/16 - 3.0 1896p 2585p 220p 1378p 165p 68913 6%
HFT - 3/16 - 4.0 2999p 3792p 310p 1896p 206p 965p 82P
HFT/OX - 3/16 - 6.0 6894p 7584p 461p 1999p 89P 2309p 206p
* Test data obtained at 12.70 mm thickness. Honeycomb is normally not tested for bare compressive strength.

Aramid paper honeycomb

This is an especially tough and damage resis-
tant product, based on a completely synthetic,
calendered 'Nomex' paper material produced
by DuPont. The core is expanded very much
like aluminum or glass fabric honeycomb and
then dip-coated with phenolic or other suit-
able resin system. The mechanical properties
of the material as a structural core are some-
what lower than aluminum, especially in
modulus, but it possesses a unique ability to
survive overloads in local areas without per-
manent damage. This translates into abuse
resistance when applied to very light interior
aircraft panels or flooring and gives the mate-
rial a competitive edge even at the higher cost
it represents. The base material is relatively
incombustible and the small amounts present
270 Sandwich construction

Table 12.5 HFT glass-reinforced phenolic honeycomb (Fibertruss bias weave)*

~~

Compressive Plate shear __-

_ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ~~~~ _ ~ ~ _ _ _ -
~

Bare Stabilized 'L' _Direction 'W' Direction-~

Honeycomb ~ ~ _ _ ~~ _
drsignation, Strength, Strength, Modulus, Strength, Modulus, Strength, Modulus,
materid - cell - densitu mi asi ksi psi ks i psi ksi
typical typical typical typical typical typical typical
HFT - 1/8 - 3.0 250p 360y 21P 185p 16P 96P 6.4~
HFT - 1/8 - 4.0 460p 530p 45P 310p 25P 150p 9.5p
HFT - 1/8- 5.5 850p 9501) 65P 460p 34P 240p 13.5p
HFT - 1/8 - 8.0 1600p 1750p 95P 600p 43P 340p 20.0p
HFT - 3/16 - 2.0 90P 140p 17P 118p 15p 55P 4.3p
HFT - 3/16 - 3.0 250p 320p 32P 170p 20P 90P 6.5~
HFT - 3/16 - 4.0 460p 530p 45P 310p 25P 150p 9.5p
IIFT/OX - 3/16 - 6.0 l000p 1100p 67P 290p 13P 335p 30.0~
* Test data obtained at 0.500 in thickness. p = preliminary properties

in typical panels result in low volumes of
smoke and gases given off in fire tests. Typical
applications make use of these properties very
effectively.As a consequence, they have grown
to a commercial volume nearly as large as that
of aluminum, for use in aircraft structures.
Uses outside the aerospace industry are lim-
ited due to the high cost of the material, but
despite this it has seen some application in
boat hulls up to 10.2 m (40 ft) in length, as well
as in skis, racing shells and several other prod-
ucts.
Aramid core is normally produced in cell
sizes of 3, 5, 6.5 and 10 mm (%, 36,X and % in),
in densities of 24-192 kg/m3 (1.5-12 lb/ft").
Densities higher than 64 kg/m3 (4 lb/ft3) are
almost entirely used for aircraft flooring.
Mechanical properties of some of these core
materials are shown in Table 12.6.
Carbon fiber honeycomb
Reinforced plastic honeycomb has for many
years employed glass fabric reinforcement,b u t
only rarely employed other fibers. In the past
few years, however, both Kevlar and carbon
fiber have become much more common as
reinforcing fibers for honeycomb. Carbon
fibers only now are beginning to be used in
space vehicles. In addition to this small usage,
however, carbon fiber honeycomb is now used
as the structural core for nacelle assemblies in
the Boeing Model 777 transport aircraft. The
constant pressure for lighter structures in such
designs has led to the use of carbon fiber fac-
ings, which have a potential corrosion
problem when used with aluminum cores.
This concern for corrosion problems has sub-
sequently led to the adoption of a new class of
carbon fiber honeycomb materials for this air-
craft and will possibly lead to further use in
other future designs.
Two types of carbon fiber cores are now
being produced. One is for purely structural
applications, while the other has a require-
ment for heat transfer through the thickness of
the panel. The former type uses only the usual
pan based carbon fibers, while the latter
employs pitch based carbon fibers, which
duplicate the heat transfer properties of the
aluminum core which it replaces. Although
neither of these materials is as yet in large vol-
ume production, the economic impact is
substantial, since these honeycombs are
markedly higher in price than the aluminum
or Nomex cores they replace.
Little data is yet available on these new
cores, but it is likely they will see substantial

use and public scrutiny in the next several
years.
Kevlar honeycomb
This honeycomb has been in use for a number
of years as a core for space vehicle antenna
reflectors. The purpose of the Kevlar honey-
comb is to allow transmission of radio signals
through the panel, while at the same time the
Kevlar facing acts as a partial reflecting antenna
for a different wavelength of a different signal.
Kevlar honeycomb, based on one of several
fabrics woven from Kevlar yarn, is usually
produced in cell sizes of 6.3-9.5 mm (%-% in) .
Usual densities available range from 16 to
64 kg/m3 (14 Ib/ft3).
Kevlar paper honeycomb
In addition to Kevlar honeycomb made from
woven fabric, DuPont has recently introduced
a new honeycomb, based on a Nomex-like
paper, which is entirely composed of fibers
derived from Kevlar. This material has rather
surprising mechanical and physical proper-
ties, with strengths well above both glass and
Nomex honeycombs and dielectric properties
somewhat superior to Nomex. This material is
trade named 'Kortex' and is available in the
usual range of cell sizes and densities.
Because the material is somewhat more
expensive than Nomex, no large scale replace-
ment of Nomex honeycomb appears likely,
although many special purpose applications
have been developed in both air and space
craft.
12.4 ADHESIVE MATERIALS
Adhesives, as they apply to sandwich struc-
tures, constitute a somewhat different family
of materials than those required to bond an
open cellular core to a stiff and continuous fac-
ing. Although these differences are less
important with some of the newer modified
epoxy materials, they remain basic and must
Adhesive materials 271
be understood by the designer and fabricator
in order for the otherwise inevitable problems
to be avoided. Some factors which merit atten-
tion are discussed below.
12.4.1 PRODUCTS GIVEN OFF DURING CURE
Some adhesive types, such as phenolic, give
off a vapor as a product of the curing reaction
and the presence of these secondary materials
can lead to several problems:
0 internal pressure, resulting in little or no
bond in some areas, or 'blisters';
0 core splitting, as the gas forces its way
through the core to a lower pressure area;
0 core movement, sometimes several inches,
resulting in an unusable cured part;
0 subsequent corrosion of core or skins by the
chemical action of the vapor or its residual
condensate.
12.4.2 BONDING PRESSURE
Adhesives such as the phenolics and some
others actually require more than atmospheric
pressure in order to prevent excessive poros-
ity. Certain forms may be suitable for solid
cores like balsa, but cannot be used at all in
open cores such as honeycomb or large cell
foams. Also, most core materials will not alone
withstand compressive bonding loads exceed-
ing a few atmospheres and consequently
cannot be used with any adhesive system
requiring higher pressures.
12.4.3 FILLET FORMING
In order to achieve a good attachment to an
open cell core, such as honeycomb, the adhe-
sive must have a unique combination of
surface tension, surface wetting and controlled
flow during early stages of cure. Controlled
flow prevents the adhesive from flowing
down the cell wall and leaving a low strength
top skin attachment and an overweight bot-
tom skin attachment.
272 Sandwich construction
Loloo
m m m
OOLo
m a m
+ e m
 Adhesive matevials 273
m o o
d N N
o m 0
d m N
m a -
s;
2.N
-..
6
u
u
m
274 Sandwich construction

12.4.4 ADAPTABILITY
The requirements noted above must all be met
while also meeting all the requirements of a
skin-to-skin to skin-to-doubler attachment. In
the case of contoured parts, the adhesive must
also be a good 'gap-filler ' without appreciable
strength penalty, since tolerance control of
details is much more difficult to achieve on
contoured than on flat panels and a greater
degree of latitude for misfit must usually be
allowed.

12.4.5 BOND LINE CONTROL

This is a need which exists because of misfitting
details and is approximately the opposite of
adaptability. It is the capability of the adhesive
to resist being squeezed out from between fay-
ing surfaces when excessive pressure is applied
to a local area of the part during cure. Many
adhesives are formulated to achieve good core
filleting and are subsequently given controlled
flow by adding an open weave cloth or fibrous
web, cast within a thicker film of adhesive. This
'scrim cloth' then prevents the faying surfaces
from squeezing out all the adhesive, which
would result in an area of low bond strength.
12.4.6 TOUGHNESS
The word 'toughness' has many meanings in
the world of adhesives. Usually, it refers to the
resistance shown by the adhesive to permit-
ting bond line cracks to grow under impact
loading. In the area of sandwich core-to-facing
bonds, it refers to the resistance shown by the
adhesive toward loads which act to separate
the facings from the core under either static or
dynamic conditions. It has been found from
experience that greater toughness in the bond
line usually equates to greater durability and
thus to longer service life.
Many types of tests have been devised to
measure toughness, but the most common one
used for sandwich structures is the climbing
drum peel test (Fig. 12.11). This test has the
Fig. 12.11 Climbing drum peel test for adequacy of
skin adhesion. The difference in diameter of the
cylinders to which the straps are attached and the
cylinder to which the skin is attached causes the
drum to rotate clockwise when tension is applied
by the universal testing machine. This arrangement
allows duplication of test results from one shop to
another.
virtue of being easily duplicated, as well as
possessing an obvious relationship to the
toughness whose value is sought. Values of
peel strength will vary considerably, depend-
inn upon:
toughness of the adhesive;
amount of adhesive used;
density of the core;
cell size of the core;
direction of the peel (with or across the rib-
bon direction);
0 adequacy of the surface preparation;
0 degradation of the adherend surface subse-
quent to bonding.
Because these variables can lead to widely dif-
fering peel strengths for the very same
adhesive, all of them must be properly under-
stood and controlled if the peel test is to be
used and its value compared to other test
results.

The peel test is used to control quality
throughout the sandwich industry. Values
obtained, provided the adhesive weight and
core material are in balance, will give indica-
tions of tooling or cure problems and of
adherend surface preparation problems. It is
particularly useful for this when an environ-
mental exposure involving both elevated
temperature and high humidity is interposed
between manufacture and test. It is also adapt-
able to use with nearly any skin material,
except that it becomes impractical with very
thick or very stiff skins.
It can be readily seen that a number of points
of difference separate the sandwich adhesives
from other structural adhesives. Fortunately for
the sandwich user, many adhesives are avail-
able which satisfactorily meet both sets of
requirements. me types available, along with
some salient features, are as follows.
12.4.7 PHENOLICS BLENDED WITH VINYLS,
RUBBERS OR EPOXY
All of these families of adhesives give off at
least some water during cure and are therefore
used only where their high strength, durabil-
ity or high temperature mechanical properties
are essential. Since the out-gassing cure prod-
ucts usually require venting or perforating the
core material and a number of non-out-
gassing, high temperature adhesives have
become available, their use as sandwich adhe-
sives has sharply declined in recent years.
12.4.8 EPOXIES MODIFIED WITH NYLON OR
OTHER POLYAMIDE POLYMERS
These adhesives were the first to have excel-
lent filleting and controlled flow along with
both high strength and high toughness,
although they are somewhat moisture sensi-
tive. Some versions are provided as one side of
a two-sided tape adhesive, in which the other
side is a rubber or vinyl-phenolic, to provide
both excellent peel and durability at the skin
side with excellent peel at the core side.
Adhesive materials 275
12.4.9 NITRILE RUBBER MODIFIED EPOXIES
These make up a broad group of more recent
materials which provide much of the flow and
toughness shown by the nylon-epoxies, along
with the durability and weather resistance of
the vinyl-phenolics. They are the most com-
mon of the 'toughened' thermosetting
adhesives and are usually limited to about
149°C (300°F) service temperature. Some of
these materials routinely achieve shear
strengths of 34500 kPa (5000psi) and most
can be cured over a wide range of tempera-
tures and pressures.
12.4.10 URETHANES
Urethane based adhesives are used in
commercial structures. Both moisture-cured
and two-part systems are available.
12.4.11 OTHER POLYIMIDES,
THERMOPLASTICS AND HIGHLY
SPECIALIZED ADHESIVES
These are used in a number of applications
ranging up to about 371°C (700°F)service tem-
perature, but do not represent either a very
large group of materials or a large volume of
usage. In addition to categorizing the available
adhesives by chemical type, they can be
grouped by the form in which they are avail-
able. Generally these are as follows.
Light liquids, heavy liquids, thixotropic
liquids, pastes, putties, or syntactic foams
Only a few are used as a core-to-facebond, but
many such materials are used in sandwich
construction to splice pieces of core to each
other in order to provide high strength edges,
areas, or surfaces, or to carry shear loads from
fittings, inserts, or end ribs. Most of the mate-
rials so used are epoxies, modified epoxies,
epoxy polyamides or epoxy polyimides.
Curing temperatures vary from as low as
4.4"C (40°F) for some two-part systems up to

276 Sandwich construction
216°C (420°F) for some of the materials
intended for service at elevated temperatures.
Supported films
Films or tapes having a carrier of light glass
fiber, cotton, nylon, or polyester fabric, or
spunbonded synthetic fiber are provided
either dry or with slight to moderate ’tack’ or
stickiness, so that the parts of the assembly
stay in place as they are being assembled.
Unsupported films, containing only the
adhesive
The very low weight films are nearly always
furnished without a carrier, as the weight of
the carrier itself becomes quite appreciable in
very light sandwich structures. They are often
hard to handle and sometimes have bond line
control problems.
Reticulating films
These are intended for use at very low
weights, with the adhesive being melted by
hot air after placing on the core, so that it
draws back to the cell edge and provides
material to form the largest possible fillet
without wasting any on the inside facing sur-
face in the middle of the cell.
Cell-edge adhesive
This is a material pre-placed on the cell edge
by the honeycomb manufacturer to provide
the same results as those produced with retic-
ulating films.
Self-adhesive skins
These skins are usually structural fabrics of
glass, graphite, quartz, or aluminum coated
glass fibers, pre-impregnated with a resin,
which is then cured so that the fiber-filled
resin becomes both the face structure and the
attaching material.
Next Page
All the above forms of adhesive are in cur-
rent use at substantial volume and most are
available from many sources.
12.5 DESIGNING A SANDWICH
The usual objective of a sandwich design is to
save weight or to increase stiffness or to use
less of an expensive skin material, or perhaps
all three. Sometimes other objectives, such as
reducing tooling or manufacturing costs,
achieving aerodynamic smoothness, reducing
reflected noise, or increasing durability under
exposure to acoustic energy, are also involved.
The designer’s problems sift down to rela-
tively few, such as getting the loads in, getting
the loads out and attaching small or large
load-carrying members, under constraints of
deflection, contour, weight and cost.
Understand the fabrication sequence and meth-
ods. The cost of a sandwich structure is
fundamentally fixed at the design stage and
a considerable difference in cost can result
from alternate solutions to the design prob-
lem. Both of the edge close-out details
shown in Fig. 12.12 perform essentially the
same job at the same weight. Placing the
legs of the channel facing outward instead
of inward saves the cost of two relief cuts
into the core and the very difficult step of
sliding the edge of the core and adhesive
into the channel. Another alternative at
even lower cost for either fixed or simply
supported edges is shown in Figs.
12.13-12.16.
Use the right core. Several densities of core
can be used in a single panel, each appro-
priate to the load carried in the area and
adhesively bonded to its neighbor, as
shown in Fig. 12.17. In many cases, how-
ever, the weight saved in lower density
areas of core is added back in the form of
core splice adhesive weight. Core splices,
such as those shown in Fig. 12.18(b)or (c),
have been used to produce ablative matrix
structures for large re-entry heat shields,