A

Review Report
On
STUDIES ON SHEAR FLOW OF FOAM CORE -GLASS /EPOXY
SKIN SANDWICH COMPOSITES IN FLEXURE

Masters of Technology in Manufacturing Engineering

May2015

ABSTRACT
Studies on understanding shear flow by varying geometry and skin to core weight ratio of
sandwich composites help understand the crux of failure patterns. Glass epoxy skin foam core
sandwich composites used in high end structural aerospace applications exhibit various types of
failures occurring over time. The current study focuses on understanding the shear flow patterns
in failure by comparing the flexural, compressive and tensile properties. Foams of low density
are chosen to fabricate the sandwich panels with glass epoxy skin by maintaining a constant skin
to core weight ratio of 4:1with various thickness 10mm, 25mm, 50mm for PUF and PIR foams
of 125kg/cum density. Foam tensile test specimens are fabricated, and tested, compression test
properties are used, and, the shift in neutral axes understood by a new novel design approach for
the flexural specimens . Analytical calculations can be done to find r ratio and shift in neutral
axes.
Keywords: Rigid foam, Glass epoxy, polyisocyanurate, polyurethane, shear flow,
shift in neutral axis ,skin to core weight ratio etc.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I register my special thanks to Dr. SK Sekar, Dean, SMBS, VIT University, for his support in the
completion of the project.
I convey my thanks to Dr.Ramanujan, Professor and Programme manager,Manufacturing
Engineering, for his boosting support and timely help in the completion of this project.
I thank my most respectful and esteemed guide Dr. K. Padmanabhan, Professor and
Assisstant director, Centre for Excellence in Nano Composites, Manufacturing division, for his
constant encouragement, timely help and insights which provided me the zeal in the completion
of the project work.
I would like to thank Prof. Kuppan, In charge of Advanced Materials and Processing Lab,
School of Mechanical and Building Sciences, who has provided the Instron machine for testing
the specimens.
I am grateful to Ramya M, Project Associate, School of Mechanical and Building
Sciences for her support and encouragement throughout the project. Her guidance has enabled
me to overcome the problems faced during the executions of the project.
I thank AR&DB (Aeronautics Research and Development Board) and VIT University for
all financial support and encouragement in pursuing a project of this magnitude and completing
it successfully.
Above all, I thank my family members for being supportive and being instrumental in the
successful completion of this project.

ii

CONTENTS
Chapter

Title

Page
No.

Abstract

Acknowledgements

ii

List Of Figures

vi

List Of Tables

vii

Nomenclature

Chapter 1 Introduction

1-13

1.1

Composites

1.11

Constituents Of Composites

1.2

Sandwich Composites

1.21 Components Of Sandwich Composites

1.3 Why Use Sandwich Composites
1.4 Acoustic Properties Of Sandwich Composites
1.4.1

Thermal And Electrical Properties

1.4.2

Mechanical And Structural Properties

1.5

Advantages And Disadvantages

1.6 Applications Of Sandwich Composites

Chapter 2 Literature Review

13-19

Chapter 3 Methodology

20-30

iii

3.1 Materials Used PUF And PIR And Glass Fabric Advantages
3.2 Calculation For Fabrication Process Of 125 Kg/M 3 Density Foam
At4:1 Panels At Various Thickness 10mm,25mm,50mm
3.3 Vacuum Bagging Process For Sandwich Panels
3.4 Fabrication Of Tensile Test Specimens

Chapter 4

Testing

30-40

4.1 Testing Of Tensile Specimens

4.2

Flexural Test

4.3

Compression Test

4.3 Theoretical Calculations

4.4 Shear Flow Diagram
4.5 Comparison Between Compression And Tensile Test For Poissons
Ratio
4.6 Failure Modes Of Sandwich Beams
4.7 R Ratio And C/D Calculations
Chapter 5 Results And Discussions
5.1

41-60

Comparison Plots For Various Foam Thicknesses (PIR-125)

With Various Mechanical Properties

5.2

Comparison Plots For Various Foam Thicknesses (PUF-125) With

Various Mechanical Properties

5.3 Tensile Behaviour Of Foams Under Instron. Load Vs Extension Plots
5.4 Tensile Test Data
5.5 Plots For Shear Flow With Various Mechanical Properties
iv

41-60

5.6 Co- Relate Shear Flow With Shift In Neutral Axis

Chapter 6 Conclusions

60

Chapter 7 References

61

List Of Tables

Table
No:

Title

Page No.

Calculation For Fabrication Process Of 125 Kg/M3 Density

3.1

Foam At4:1 Panels With 10mm,25mm,50mm.

24

3.2

Foam Properties Of Puf & Pir125

25

4.1

Poisons Ratio And Compressive Stress Values From

Compression Test

37

4.2

Poisons Ratio And Compressive Stress Values From Tensile

Test

38

Mechanical Properties Of Puf & Pir125 At 4:1skin To

5.1

Weight Ratio With Thickness 10mm,25mm,50mm

40

5.2

Tensile Test Data

48

5.3

Comparison Of C/D Ratio In Tensile Foam Specimen For

49

Puf &Pir125
Shear Flow In Pir -125 And Puf -125(4:1skin To Weight
5.4

Ratio)

50

List Of Figures
vi

Figure
No.

Title

Page No.

vii

1.1

Structure Of Sandwich Composite

1..2

Typical Sandwich Construction

3.1

Polyurethane Foam Board

21

3.2
3.3
3.4

Poly Iso-Cynurate Foam

Glass Fabric (280 Gsm)

Glass Fabric (100 Gsm)

22
23
23

3.5

Cross Section Of Vacuum Bagging Process

26

3.6

Pir -125 ,4:1(10mm) Sandwich Panels Kept In Sealed

Vacuum Bags For Curing

27

Puf 125 ,4:1. (50mm)Vacuum Bagging Technique For

3.7

Fabrication Of Sandwich Composites

28

3.8

Fabrication Of Tensile Specimen After Hand Mill Grinding

28

3.9

Grooves Made At The End Of Specimens ,Glass Laminates

Inserted Into Grooves

29

4.1

Instron 8801 Machine For Testing

31

4.2

Puf 125 Sample Before Tensile Test

32

4.3

Pir125 Sample Before Tensile Test

32

viii

4.4

Testing Of PIR-125-4:1-16:1 Specimen

33

4.5

Testing Of PUF -125-4:1-16:1 Specimen

33

4.6

PUF-125 Foam Compression Test

33

4.7

Experimental Set Up Of PUF& PIR Foams In Compression

Test

34

4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13

Foam Core Sandwich Construction Showing The

34

Architecture
Shear Flow Diagram

37

Tensile Fracture Of Face Sheets

38

Face Sheet Wrinkling

38

Shear Failure In Core

39

Delamination

39

5.1
5.2
5.3

Foam Thickness Vs Maximum Bending Stress

.Foam Thickness Vs. Normal Stress (N/Mm2)
Foam Thickness Vs. Shear Strength In Core

41
41
42

5.4.

Foam Thickness Vs. Bending Shape Factor For Stiffness

42

5.5

Foam Thickness Vs Flexural Rigidity Per Unit Width

43

5.6

Foam Thickness Vs Shear Deflection

43

5.7

Foam Thickness Vs Shear Strain At Max Load

44

5.8

Load Vs Extension Plot For PIR -125 Sample-1

45

5.9

;Load Vs Extension Plot For PIR -125 Sample-2

45

5.10

Load Vs Extension Plot For PIR -125 Sample-3

46

5.11

;Load Vs Extension Plot For PUF -125 Sample-1

46

5.12

Load Vs Extension Plot For PUF -125 Sample-2

47

5.13

Load Vs Extension Plot For PUF -125 Sample-3

47

ix

5.14

Shear Flow Vs Maximum Bending Stress (N/Mm2)

51

5.15

Thickness Vs Shear Flow (N/Mm)

51

5.16

Shear Flow Vs Normal Stress

52

5.17

Shear Flow Vs Shear Deflection

52

5.18

Shear Flow Vs Shear Strain

53

5.19

Shear Flow Vs Flexural Rigidity Per Unit Width

53

5.20

Shear Flow Vs Max Bending Stress

54

5.21

Shear Flow Vs Normal Stress

54

5.22

Shear Flow Vs Flexural Rigidity Per Unit Width

55

5.23

Shear Flow Vs Bending Shape Factor

55

5.24

Shear Flow Vs Shear Deflection

56

5.25

Shear Flow Vs Shear Strain

57

5.26

Shift in neutral axis Vs Shear Flow for pir 125

58

5.27

Shift in neutral axisvs Shear Flow for puf 125

58

NOMENCLATURE
h = Total height of sandwich
b = width of the specimen
t = thickness of the skin
Ef = Elastic modulus of the fabric
Ec = Elastic modulus of the core
d = Centroidal height of the specimen
c = Core thickness
x

W = maximum load
= deflection corresponding to maximum load
a = span of the specimen
M = Bending moment
y = distance from the neutral axis
D = Flexural Rigidity
shear = Shear deflection
b = Bending stress
B = Bending strength
c = Maximum shear stress in core
= Shear strain
x = Normal stress
If = Second moment of inertia
be = Bending shape factor for stiffness
bf = Shape factor for failure in bending
GFRP = Glass Fibre Resin Polymer
GSM = Grams per square meter
FRP = Fibre-reinforced polymer
ASTM = American Society for Testing and Material

xi

CHAPTER 1
1. INTRODUCTION
COMPOSITE MATERIALS:
The composite material is made from two or more constituent materials with significantly
different physical or chemical properties that remain separate and distinct at the macroscopic or
microscopic scale within the finished structure is called composite. One of the phases is usually
discontinuous, stiffer, and stronger and is called the reinforcement, whereas the less stiff and
weaker phase is continuous and is called the matrix. Sometimes because of chemical interactions
or other processing effect, an additional distinct phase called an interphase exists between the
reinforcement and the matrix. The area which separates the fibre from the matrix and may differ
from them chemically, physically and mechanically is called interface.
CONSTITUENTS OF COMPOSITES:
RESINS:
Typically, most common polymer-based composite materials, including fibreglass, carbon
fibre, and Kevlar, include at least two parts, the substrate and the resin. Polyester resin tends to
have yellowish tint, and is suitable for most backyard projects. Its weaknesses are that it is UV
sensitive and can tend to degrade over time, and thus generally is also coated to help preserve it.
It is often used in the making of surfboards and for marine applications. Its hardener is a
peroxide, often MEKP (methyl ethyl ketone peroxide). When the peroxide is mixed with the
resin, it decomposes to generate free radicals, which initiate the curing reaction. Hardeners in
these systems are commonly called catalysts, but since they do not re-appear unchanged at the
end of the reaction, they do not fit the strictest chemical definition of a catalyst.
Vinyl ester resin tends to have a purplish to bluish to greenish tint. This resin has lower
viscosity than polyester resin, and is more transparent. This resin is often billed as being fuel
resistant, but will melt in contact with gasoline. This resin tends to be more resistant over time to
degradation than polyester resin, and is more flexible. It uses the same hardeners as polyester
resin (at a similar mix ratio) and the cost is approximately the same. Epoxy resin is almost totally
transparent when cured. In the aerospace industry, epoxy is used as a structural matrix material
or as structural glue.
1

Shape memory polymer (SMP) resins have varying visual characteristics depending on
their formulation. These resins may be epoxy-based, which can be used for auto body and
outdoor equipment repairs; cyanate-ester-based, which are used in space applications and acryl
ate-based, which can be used in very cold temperature applications, such as for sensors that
indicate whether perishable goods have warmed above a certain maximum temperature. These
resins are unique in that their shape can be repeatedly changed by heating above their glass
transition temperature (Tg). When heated, they become flexible and elastic, allowing for easy
configuration. Once they are cooled, they will maintain their new shape. The resins will return to
their original shapes when they are reheated above their Tg. The advantage of shape memory
polymer resins is that they can be shaped and reshaped repeatedly without losing their material
properties. These resins can be used in fabricating shape memory composites.
REINFORCEMENT:

Fibre
Reinforcement usually adds rigidity and greatly impedes crack propagation. Thin fibres
can have very high strength, and provided they are mechanically well attached to the
matrix they can greatly improve the composite's overall properties.
Fibre-reinforced composite materials can be divided into two main categories normally
referred to as short fibre reinforced materials and continuous fibre-reinforced materials.
Continuous reinforced materials will often constitute a layered or laminated structure.
The woven and continuous fibre styles are typically available in a variety of forms, being
pre-impregnated with the given matrix (resin), dry, uni-directional tapes of various
widths, plain weave, harness satins, braided, and stitched.
The short and long fibres are typically employed in compression moulding and sheet
moulding operations. These come in the form of flakes, chips, and random mate (which
can also be made from a continuous fibre laid in random fashion until the desired
thickness of the ply / laminate is achieved).
Common fibres used for reinforcement include glass fibres, carbon fibres, cellulose
(wood/paper fibre and straw) and high strength polymers for example - aramid.

SANDWICH COMPOSITES:
2

Sandwich structured composites are a special class of composite materials which have
become very popular due to high specific strength and bending stiffness. Low density of these
materials makes them especially suitable for use in aeronautical, space and marine applications .
Sandwich panels are composite structural elements, consisting of two thin, stiff, strong faces
separated by a relatively thick layer of low-density and stiff material. The faces are commonly
made of steel, aluminium, composite and the core material may be foam, honeycomb and balsa
wood. The faces and the core material are bonded together with an adhesive to facilitate the load
transfer mechanisms between the components. This particular layered composition creates a
structural element with both high bending stiffness - weight and bending strength weight ratio .

Figure1.1:Structure of Sandwich composite

\

Figure 1.2 : Typical sandwich construction

COMPONENTS IN SANDWICH COMPOSITES
Sandwich composites primarily have two components namely, skin and core as
shown in Figure1. If an adhesive is used to bind skins with the core, the adhesive layer can also
be considered as an additional component in the structure. The thickness of the adhesive layer is
generally neglected because it is much smaller than the thickness of skins or the core. The
properties of sandwich composites depend upon properties of the core and skins, their relative
thickness and the bonding characteristics between them.
Core:
Based on the performance requirements, large numbers of materials are used as core. Popular
core materials can be divided into three classes as described below.
1. Low density solid materials: open and closed cell structured foams, balsa and other types of
wood.
2. Expanded high-density materials in cellular form: honeycomb, web core.
3. Expanded high-density materials in corrugated form: truss, corrugated sheets.
4

High-density materials used for the purpose of making expanded core include aluminum,
titanium and various polymers. The structure of the core material affects the interfacial contact
area between skins and the core. Expanded high density materials normally provide much
smaller contact area compared to the solid low density materials. The choice of appropriate
structure for core provides additional parameter to design a sandwich composite as per given
specifications or service conditions. The use of cores like closed cell structured foam gives some
distinct advantages over open cell structured foams and cores. The specific compressive strength
of close cell structured foams is much higher. They also absorb less moisture than open cell
structured foam.
Skins:
A wide variety of materials are available for use as skins. Sheets of metals like aluminum,
titanium and steel and fibre reinforced plastics are some of the common examples of skin
materials. In case of fibre reinforced skins, the material properties can be controlled directionally
in order to tailor the properties of the sandwich composite. Fibre reinforced polymers are used
widely as skins due to their low density and high specific strength. Another advantage offered by
the use of polymer composites in skins is that the same polymer can be used to make the skin
and the core. Cross-linking of polymer between core and skin would provide adhesion strength
level equal to the strength of the polymer. This provides possibility of making the skin an integral
part of the structure eliminating the requirement of the adhesive. When an adhesive is used to
bond the skin and the core together, selection of adhesives becomes very important, as they
should be compatible with both the skin and the core materials. The adhesion must have desired
strength level and should remain unaffected by the working environment. In case of metallic
components, welding or brazing is used as a means of binding the core and skins together. Use of
adhesives is also possible but is limited to such cases where one or more of the components
cannot withstand heat. Choice of skins is important from the point of view of the work
environment as this part of the structure comes in direct contact with the environment. Corrosion,
heat transfer characteristics, thermal expansion characteristics, moisture absorption and other
properties of the whole sandwich composite can be controlled by proper choice of skin material.
In most cases both skins of the sandwich are of the same type, but could be of different type
depending up on specific requirements. Difference may be in terms of materials, thickness, fibre
orientation, fibre volume fraction or in any other possible form.
5

Why to use sandwich composites:

Sandwich composites are becoming more and more popular in structural design, mainly for
their ability to substantially decrease weight while maintaining mechanical performance. This
weight reduction results in a number of benefits, including increased range, higher payloads and
decreased fuel consumption. All have a positive impact on cost as well as a decreased impact on
the environment. These benefits are possible because, as has long been known, separating two
materials with a lightweight material in between increases the structures stiffness and strength.
This distinction, along with many other material characteristics available through strategic choice
of core material such as thermal insulation, low water absorption, sound and dielectric
properties, among others benefit a wide range of industries and applications, including wind,
marine, aerospace, transportation and industry.
Decrease weight Reduce the impact on the environment One of the most driving reasons
to use sandwich composites is that they provide mechanical properties to much lower weight
than traditional monolithic materials (for example, steel). It is not only the sandwich principle
itself that makes this possible. Sandwich composite materials also enable designers to engineer
with extreme precision to their loading requirements. Core is one of the variables in a sandwich
composite that enables this due to the wide range of mechanical properties it provides. In other
words, a sandwich solution will prevent over engineering, save weight and increase performance
compared to many designs that use conventional materials such as wood and steel. The
combination of sandwich principle and core material saves energy and enables faster and more
effective solutions in many areas. For example, sandwich composite design is an absolute
necessity to reach competitive cost per megawatt from wind energy. In transportation, lower
weight in container or vessel construction enables higher payloads resulting in reduced
emissions. Sandwich composites provide vital strength and speed for the sports equipment
segment. In industry, a lightweight solution can result in faster and smaller robots. In
construction, a bridge or faade designed with sandwich composites facilitates fast, effective
installation. Clearly, the benefits of lightweight solutions go on and on. Obviously, anything that
moves consumes energy. The heavier it is, the more energy consumed. Since using sandwich
composites makes structural designs lighter, sandwich solutions are extremely environmentally
6

friendly. With a sandwich solution, less material is consumed in the construction. This saves
resources as well as weight in the final construction, making the construction less energyconsuming over its lifetime. To illustrate the impact weight has on the environment, follow any
kind of vessel whether airplane, bus, train or car through its lifetime (25 years). Every kilo
saved in its construction results in less energy needed to move people or materials around the
world. Less energy expended every day for 25 years saves the environment from enormous
amounts of pollutants. A simplified comparison between a steel panel and a composite panel is
shown under the heading Basics of sandwich composite, demonstrating and explaining the
potential weight savings from using sandwich composites. Due to increasing fuel costs, many
industries are also realizing it is not only good for the environment, but it also costs less to
design with lightweight solutions. The environmental impact of material choice in the beginning
(energy) and in the end (recycling) of a vessels life cycle is minor (as long as the material choice
saves weight) in comparison with the vessels fuel savings over its lifetime.
benefits with sandwich composites :
Those described above are the main benefits and reasons many industries use sandwich
composites. However, with diverse structural core materials to choose from each with its own
set of material characteristics you can obtain additional benefits. (By structural core material
we mean a core material that has a specification and tolerances, as well as significant mechanical
performance.) Here we mention a few of the most important benefits.
Fire, Smoke & Toxicity (FST) FST regulations are tough in applications involving public
transportation like buses, trains and aircraft. In order to harvest the benefits of sandwich
composites, some structural core materials have specific raw materials making them selfextinguishable as well as nontoxic when burning, qualifying them for use in public
transportation. Thermal insulation Polymer core materials are built up by a cell structure. These
cells are filled with air. Due to this, some core materials do not transfer heat or cold well. This
could be of great benefit in, for instance, the building industry, subsea applications or
applications where insulation is important.
Sound insulation Based on the same principle of cell structure, some core materials
(particularly those with closed cell structures) have a good ability to insulate/absorb sound. This
is useful in many applications, such as speakers, but first and foremost in aircraft interiors, where

good sound insulation improves the interior environment in commercial airliners and private
aircraft.
Corrosion resistance Removing the risk for corrosion has a significant impact on ensuring long
operational lifetime for an application. With their non-corrosive properties, using polymer core
materials and polymer skins eliminates the risk for corrosion damages on a structure. This makes
sandwich composites ideal for marine applications as well as subsea structures.
Very low water absorption For applications used in marine environments or in places
with moisture or condensation, polymer core materials are excellent. The reason for this is, once
again, the closed cell structure. This prevents water or moisture from entering the core and
increasing weight or ruining mechanical performance. This is also important for aircraft interiors,
where traditional materials like honeycombs trap water in the cell structure, adding weight
during its lifetime. In comparison, most closed cell polymer materials have extremely low water
vapor permeability or water absorption over their lifetime. Ease of repair Sandwich composites
are easy to repair.
Cracks and slamming damage can be repaired relatively easily without reducing the structures
mechanical performance. Compared to steel, for which a large part of the structure must be cut
out and replaced, professionals can repair a sandwich composite locally without reducing the
performance or the design.
Dielectric properties some core materials have excellent dielectric properties. This means they
do not interfere with radio waves useful when designing and building radomes, spherical
housing for radar equipment or x-ray equipment.
PROPERTIES OF SANDWICH COMPOSITES:
ACOUSTICAL PROPERTIES OF SANDWICH COMPOSITE MATERIALS:
In applications where the use of lightweight structures is important viscoelastic core layer,
which has high inherent damping, between two face sheets, can produce a sandwich
structure with high damping. Composite sandwich structures have several advantages, such
as their high strength-to-weight ratio, excellent thermal insulation, and good performance
as water and vapor barriers. So in recent years, such structures have become used
increasingly in transportation vehicles. However their fatigue, vibration and acoustic
properties are known less. This is a problem since such composite materials tend to be

more brittle than metals because of the possibility of delamination and fibre breakage.
Structures excited into resonant vibration exhibit very high amplitude displacements which
are inversely proportional to their passive damping. The transmission loss of such
composite panels is also poor at coincidence. Their passive damping properties and
attempts to improve their damping at the design stage are important, because the damping
properties affect their sound transmission loss, especially in the critical frequency range,
and also their vibration response to excitation. The research objects in this dissertation are
polyurethane foam-filled honeycomb sandwich structures. The foam-filled honeycomb
cores demonstrate advantages of mechanical properties over pure honeycomb and pure
foam cores. Previous work including theoretical models, finite element models, and
experimental techniques for passive damping in composite sandwich structures was
reviewed. The general dynamic behavior of sandwich structures was discussed. The effects
of thickness and delamination on damping in sandwich structures were analyzed.
Measurements on foam-filled honeycomb sandwich beams with different configurations
and thicknesses have been performed and the results were compared with the theoretical
predictions. A new modal testing method using the Gabor analysis was proposed. A
wavelet analysis-based noise reduction technique is presented for frequency response
function analysis. Sound transmission through sandwich panels was studied using the
statistical energy analysis (SEA). Modal density, critical frequency, and the radiation
efficiency of sandwich panels were analyzed.
THERMAL PROPERTIES OF SANDWICH COMPOSITES:
Heat conductive materials, which are widely used in the fields like electronic
information, electrical engineering and aerospace, are required high thermal conductivity,
excellent electrical insulation, corrosive resistance, chemical stability .

ELECTRICAL PROPERTIES OF SANDWICH COMPOSITES:

Electrical properties of adherent, low stressed aluminum nitride films prepared by magnetron
sputtering have been studied. Arrhenius plots in the 100-170C range of temperature and
transient current curves with different bias steps (at room temperature and 150C) have been
performed. The conduction activation energy has been found and its dependence on subsequent
9

annealings has been studied. A phenomenological conduction model at the ITO-AlN interface
based on the shape of the transient curves has been elaborated. The conditions of behaviour of
AlN as a highly insulating layer (sputtering conditions, thicknesses, annealing temperatures)
have been established
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF SANDWICH COMPOSITES:
The strength of the composite material is dependent largely on two factors:
The outer skins: If the sandwich is supported on both sides, and then stressed by

means of a force in the middle of the beam, then the bending moment will
introduce shear forces in the material. The shear forces result in the bottom skin
in tension and the top skin in compression. The core material spaces these two
skins apart. The thicker the core material the stronger the composite.
The interface between the core and the skin: Because the shear stresses in the

composite material change rapidly between the core and the skin, the adhesive
layer also sees some degree of shear force. If the adhesive bond between the two
layers is too weak, the most probable result will be delamination.
The sandwich composites with 0 GF orientation possessed relatively much higher mechanical
properties as compared with those with 45 and 90 GF orientations, especially for the impact
strength. Low mechanical properties of the sandwich composites with 45 and 90 GF
orientation angles could be overcome by incorporation of DOP plasticizer into the GF/PVC core
layer with the recommended DOP loadings of 510 parts per hundred by weight of PVC
components.

STRUCTURAL PROPERTIES:
There are many core and face sheet materials that can be selected for the sandwich construction.
The components of the sandwich are bonded together using adhesives or mechanical fastenings
such that they can act as a composite load bearing unit. The basic underlying concept of
sandwich is that face sheets carry the bending stress and the cores carry the shear stress. The
10

bending stiffness of the sandwich is very much higher than a solid structure having the same total
weight and the same material as the facings.
Structural Considerations:
As properties of honeycomb cores and face sheet materials are directional, it is vital to make sure
that the materials are oriented along the optimum axis to take the best advantage. These
structures are used to maximize stiffness at very low weights. The face sheets should be thick
enough to withstand tensile and compressive stresses induced by mechanical loads. The overall
structure should have high flexural and shear rigidity to avoid high deflections under heavy
loads. The face sheets should have sufficient stiffness to provide higher fundamental frequency.
The cores should have sufficient shear modulus to prevent buckling of the sandwich under load.
Fibre and matrix in composites
I. Role of fibre:
a. Depending upon the volume fraction, 70-90% of the load is carried by fibres.
b. They provide strength, stiffness, thermal stability and other structural properties in the
composites.
c. They provide electrical conductivity or insulation depending on the material.
II. Role of matrix:
a. To provide a good surface finish and aid in the protection of net shape or near shape parts.
b. To provide protection to reinforcing fibres against chemical attack and mechanical damage.
c. Matrix isolates individual fibres so that they can act separately and slow the propagation of the
crack.
d. To provide rigidity and shape to the structure.
e. Bind the fibres and transfer the load to the fibres.
Types of resins Resins are used to transfer stress between the reinforcing fibres. They act as a
glue to hold the fibres together and protect the fibres from mechanical and environmental
damage. There are two major groups into which resins are divided. They are
I.

Thermoplastic resins: They become soft when heated, and maybe shaped or moulded
while in a heated semi-fluid state and become rigid when cooled.
Polypropylene, Polyethylene.
11

Example:

II.

Thermo-set resins: They are usually liquids or low melting point solids in their initial
form which solidify irreversibly when heated. Example: Epoxies, Vinyl esters.

Properties of Sandwich Composites:

Main advantage of any type of composite material is the possibility of tailoring their
properties according to the application. The same advantage also applies to sandwich
composites. Proper choice of core and skins makes sandwich composites adaptive to a large
number of applications and environmental conditions. Some general characteristics of sandwich
composites are described below:
1. Low density: Choice of lightweight core or expanded structures of high-density materials
decrease the overall density of the sandwich composite. Volume of core is considerably higher in
the sandwich composite compared to the volume of skins so any decrease in the density of the
core material has significant effect on the overall sandwich density.
2. Bending stiffness: This property comes from the skin part of the sandwich. Due to a higher
specific stiffness sandwich composites result in lower lateral deformation, higher buckling
resistance and higher natural frequencies compared to other structures.
3. Tensile and compressive strength: The z-direction properties are controlled by the properties of
core and x and y directions properties are controlled by properties of skins.
4. Damage tolerance: Use of flexible foam or crushable material as core makes sandwich
material highly damage tolerant structure. For this reason foam core or corrugated core sandwich
structured materials are popular materials in packaging applications.
ADVANTAGES OF SANDWICH COMPOSITES
Some of the advantages of sandwich composites are:
Tailoring of properties according to requirements.
Large available choice of constituents for core and skins.
Low density leading to saving of weight.
High bending stiffness.
Higher damage tolerance.
In-situ fabrication.
Good vibration damping capacity.
12

LIMITATIONS OF SANDWICH COMPOSITES

There are current limitations that can be overcome through the development of new material
sand manufacturing methods. Some of these are:
Higher thickness of the sandwich composites.
Higher cost of sandwich composites compared to conventional materials.
Processing is expensive.
Difficult to join.
Difficult to repair, if damaged.
APPLICATIONS OF SANDWICH COMPOSITES
There are several applications that require materials of low density, high strength and high
damage tolerance. Due to their lightweight, sandwich composites are widely used in various
kinds of vehicles used for air, ground or sea transportation. Some of the main areas of
applications of sandwich composites are listed below.
1. Structural applications: aircraft, spacecraft, submarine, ships and boats, surface transport
vehicles, building materials etc.
2. Packaging materials.
3. Thermal and electrical insulation.
4. Storage tanks.
Innovativeness is essential in finding new combinations of core and skin materials and new
waysto use them in various applications where conventional materials have already reached
theirperformance limits.

13

LITERATURE REVIEW
Rodrigo Silva et al (1998) (2) studied the sandwich composite plate effects of the
transverse shear deformation are often significant. For this reason, the results of the first-order
shear deformation theory (FSDT) can be severely affected by the choice of the shear correction
factor (k), especially in sandwich plates with low shear modulus core. The objective of this
research work was to validate the first-order shear deformation theory (FSDT) in the elastic
analysis of sandwich plate structures. The FSDT was compared with a solid finite element
model which approximates the three-dimensional elasticity solution.

The static response

(deflection and axial strain) under transverse uniform load and first natural frequency of
vibration were investigated. Three values of k were considered: 1) Based on shear strain energy
equivalence, 2) Based on a parabolic transverse shear strain distribution 3) Isotropic plates
(k=5/6). In addition, a simplified model for sandwich plates was evaluated. The effect of the
span/depth ratio and transverse shear modulus of the core material was studied as well. The
analyzed sandwich plates were symmetric cross-ply laminates with simply supported boundary
conditions. The face sheets are made of woven E-glass/Vinyl ester composite. Two core
materials were considered: balsa wood and foam. It was found that a good correlation between
the FSDT using k, based on strain energy and the simplified model for sandwich plates with the
solid finite element model in the prediction of deflection, strain and natural frequencies.
Therefore, the FSDT can be confidently applied to the linear elastic analysis of sandwich plates.
R.Vijayalakshmi Rao made an attempt[3] to study the flexural and fatigue
behavior of E- glass/Vinyl ester/Polyurethane foam sandwich composites. Three types of
sandwich composites were synthesized with E-glass fabric and polyurethane foam densities
having 65:35 ratio of fibre to resin weight fraction. The sandwich specimens were prepared by
hand lay-up method followed by compression at room temperature. The specimens are then
tested mechanically to ensure flexural and fatigue behavior. The objective of the present work is
to investigate the integrity of sandwich composites with E-glass reinforcements over the
14

variation of foam density. The effect of different test frequencies such as 1Hz, 3Hz, 5Hz, 7Hz
and 9Hz respectively are applied during the test. The experimental study reveals that the cyclic
load and test frequency play a critical role in determining fatigue strength and change in core
density attributes to the failure through foam-face sheet delamination, and at higher frequencies
early stiffness degradation leading to foam crushing and failure dictated by the shear strength of
the sandwich composites.
C. Borsellino [4] studied experimental and numerical evaluation of sandwich
composite structures. The main problem working with sandwich composite structures is their
intrinsic anisotropy and non-homogeneity that does not allow their correct modelling. Nowadays,
the available data on mechanical properties of complex structures, necessary to allow a
correct and reliable design, are not sufficient. The aim of the present work is to extend the
knowledge of mechanical properties bothon single components and on complete structures,
focusing on the effects induced by different kind of skin arrangements (Kevlar,glass and carbon
fibres). Compressive, shear and flexural tests were performed for a complete static mechanical
characterisation of the sandwich structure both on each single component and on the complex
structures in order to acquire important comparisonparameters. The mechanical results of each
component were used as input data in order to implement the FEM analysis by the commercial
ANSYS code. A simplified model is proposed to simulate the compressive and flexural tests of a
glass fibre sandwich structure. In addition their mechanical behaviour has been compared with
experimental data by the aforesaid static tests of complex sandwich structure.
Xing-jiang MA [5] had done three-point bending of sandwich beams with aluminum
foam-filled corrugated cores. Static three-point bending tests of aluminum foam sandwiches with
glued steel panel were performed. The deformation and failure of sandwich structure with
different thicknesses of panel and foam core were investigated. The results indicate that the
maximum bending load increases with the thickness of both steel panel and foam core. The
failure of sandwich can be ascribed to the crush and shear damage of foam core and the
delamination of glued interface at a large bending load. The crack on the foam wall developed in
the melting foam procedure is the major factor for the failure of foam core. The sandwich
structure with thick foam core and thin steel panel has the optimal specific bending strength. The
maximum bending load of that with 8 mm panel and 50 mm foam core is 66.06 kN.

15

Chava Uday et al [6] had studies on double lap shear and peel properties of sandwich
composites-The focus of the investigation is on adhesively bonded joints of glass/epoxy skinrigid unfilled thermoset foam core material sandwich composite structures to study their shear
failure properties. Rigid foam cores of Polyurethane (PUF) or Polyisocyanurate (PIR) of four
different densities 64,125,250 and 500 kg/m3 were used with uniform thicknesses. Plain weave
glass fabric and a room temperature epoxy GY 257 with A140 hardener were used for the skin
design. The lap shear and peel test specimens were prepared by vacuum bagging technique. The
double lap shear properties were compared with the single lap shear properties, evaluated and a
detailed comparative analysis was made on the influence of different foam densities and their
adhesion to the skin on the failure behaviour of otherwise identical sandwich composite
samples[5]. The peel properties of the skin were also evaluated in Mode I cantilever set up
against foams of different densities. The highlight of his work was, comparison of porosity levels
of foams, their influence on adhesive and cohesive fracture, failure mode property correlation
and the usefulness of the obtained data in the design of sandwich joints.
Vishakh Vijayan [7] investigated on the influence of foam densities and span to depth
ratios on the Flexural properties of rigid polyisocyanurate foam-glass fabric/epoxy Sandwich
Composites The experimental investigation here focuses on the study of flexural and shear
properties of sandwich composites. Rigid unfilled thermoset Polyisocyanurate (PIR) foam is
used as the core material and glass fabric reinforced epoxy based laminates are used as the outer
skin layers of the sandwich. PIR foams with densities of 125kg/m3 and 250kg/m3 are used for
the study. Skin to core weight ratios of 3:1 and 4:1 were maintained for the panels fabricated
separately with the vacuum bagging technique. Specimens with varying span to depth ratios of
16:1, 12:1 and 6:1 were tested using an Instron UTM machine. The investigation follows a threepoint bending test method carried out for finding bending strength, flexure rigidity, shear
deflection, shear stress, shear strain etc. The test results were compared and analyzed in depth to
find the influence of the core density and span to depth ratios on the flexural and shear properties
of the sandwich composite. Useful conclusions have been drawn based on the fracture behaviour
of these sandwich composites.
Surya Teja Varma[8] - The experimental studies for determining the flexural properties of thermo
set rigid polyurethane unfilled foam core glass/epoxy skin sandwich composites, are presented
16

here. Sandwich composites were fabricated in the shape of panels by using glass fabric/epoxy
as the skin material and rigid polyurethane foam (PUF) as the core. PUF materials of 125 & 250
kg/m3 foam densities with 3:1 & 4:1 skin to core weight ratios were fabricated separately using
the vacuum bagging technique. The sandwich panels were tested at different span to depth ratios.
The flexural properties like the bending strength, flexural rigidity, shear stress, shear deflection
and shear strain were evaluated and a detailed analysis made on the influence of foam densities
and different span to depth ratios on the fracture behaviour of these sandwich composites in
flexure. Due comparisons have been made on the flexural behaviour with other foams also.
L. J. GIBSON[9] A new method for maximizing stiffness per unit weight in sandwich
beams with foam cores is described. Optimum values of core thickness, face thickness and core
density are obtained from the analysis. Measurements of the stiffness per unit weight have been
made on sandwiches with foamed polyurethane cores. The theoretical analysis is in good
agreement with the results of these tests.
Hemnath T and Padmanabhan K, [10]Study of the strength of polyurethane foam core/
fabric reinforced-epoxy based sandwich composites with and without design optimization using
the finite element software ANSYS, an experimental hand lay-up technique and mechanical
testing in a Universal testing machine
Fredrik Edgrenet [11] plastic micro buckling approach is investigated in order to see
whether it can be used to analytically predict the residual strength of carbon ber sandwich
structures. A parametric study on impact damage resistance and residual strength of sandwich
panels with carbon ber-vinylester faces and PVC foam core is conducted. Two sandwich
congurations are studied. The rst conguration consists of thin faces and an intermediate
density core, representative of a panel from a superstructure. The second conguration consists
of thick faces and a high density core, representative of a panel from a hull. Two different
impactor geometries are used. One spherical impactor and one pyramid shaped impactor are used
in a drop weight rig to inict low velocity impact damage of different energy levels in the face of
the sandwich. The damages achieved ranges from barely visible damages to penetration of one
face. Residual strength is tested using in-plane compression of the sandwich plates either
instrumented with strain gauges or monitored with digital speckle photography.

17

L.L. Yan a et al [12)]Three-point bending of sandwich beams with aluminum foamfilled corrugated cores. Sandwich panels having metallic corrugated cores had distinctly
different attributes from those having metal foam cores, the former with high specific
stiffness/strength and the latter with superior specific energy absorption capacity. To explore the
attribute diversity, all-metallic hybrid-cored sandwich constructions with aluminum foam blocks
inserted into the interstices of steel corrugated plates were fabricated and tested under three-point
bending. Analytical predictions of the bending stiffness, initial failure load, peak load, and failure
modes were obtained and compared with those measured. Good agreementbetween analysis and
experiment was achieved. Failure maps were also constructed to reveal themechanisms of initial
failure. Foam insertions altered not only the failure mode of the corrugated sandwich but also
increased dramatically its bending resistance. All-metallic sandwich constructions with foamfilled corrugated cores hold great potential as novel lightweight structural materials for a wide
range of structural and crushing/impulsive loading applications.
K.H. Leong [13] Tensile tests were performed on glass reinforced polymer (GRP) composites
with three-dimensional (3D) orthogonal, normal layered interlock, and offset layered interlock
woven bre architectures. The mechanical properties and failure mechanisms under tensile
loading were similar for the three composites. Cracks formed at low strains within the resin-rich
channels between the bre tows and around the through-thickness binder yarns in the
composites, although this damage did not alter the tensile properties. At higher applied tensile
stresses the elastic modulus was reduced by 2030% due to inelastic tow straightening and
cracking around the most heavily crimped in-plane tows. Further softening occurred at higher
strains by inelastic straightening of all the tows. Composite failure occurred within a localised
region and the discrete tow rupture events that have caused tow lock-up and pullout mechanisms
in other 3D woven composites were not observed.
Brahmananda Pramanik, P. Raju Manten [14]This paper presents an investigation on energy
absorption characteristics of nano-reinforced panels, laminated face sheets and sandwich
composites in high velocity ballistic and low velocity punch-shear experiments. The vinyl ester
panels were reinforced with 1.25 and 2.5 wt. percent nanoclay and exfoliated graphite platelets.
18

Three different face sheets were manufactured with E-glass, Owens Corning HP ShieldStrand
glass and T-700 Carbon woven fabric in vinyl ester; and one with the E-glass and graphite
platelets impregnated vinyl ester matrix. The sandwich composites were fabricated with balsa,
PVC foam, 3-D fibre reinforced Tycor and fire resistant fly-ash based Eco-Core cores in
between E-glass/vinyl ester face sheets. Ballistic tests were conducted according to NIJ level III
using a universal re- ceiver equipped with a barrel to launch 0.308 caliber M80 ball round
projectile at about 890 m/s. Low velocity punch-shear tests were performed at around 3 m/s
according to ASTM D3763 Standard using a drop-weight impact test system. The tortuosity of
the fractured surface in nanocomposite specimens has been investigated using digital microscope. In ballistic tests, the 3-D fibre reinforced Tycor core provided the most resistance when
projectile strikes at the web-flange interface region. The 2.5 wt. pct. graphite platelet reinforced
nanocomposite, HP ShieldStrand glass vinyl ester face sheets, and E-glass/Eco-Core
sandwich composite showed the best energy absorption under low velocity punch-shear

19

CHAPTER-3
METHODOLOGY& APPROACH
The objective of this paper is fabrication of tensile test specimens in dog bone shape for
125 kg/m3 density foam, with thickness of 10mm, using vacuum bagging technique. Glass fabric
s used as skin material and PUF and PIR used as core materials. Sandwich panels with varying
thickness 10mm, 25mm, 50mm are considered for the present investigation. The flexural
specimens tested at different span to depth ratios, mainly 16:1, skin to core weight ratio of 4:1 is
considered to understand the shear flow and shift in neutral axis in the flexural specimens. The
mechanical properties for the sandwich panels are to be calculated for the above conditions.
Selection of Required Materials:

Glass fabric: 280 & 100 GSM, plain weave

Epoxy: GY257
Hardener: ARADUR 140
Room Temperature Cured System
Foam: Thermo-set Unfilled Rigid Polyurethane, rigid poly isocynuarate.

MATERIALS USED
POLYURETHANE FOAM: Polyurethane (PUR and PU) is a polymer composed of a chain
of organic units

joined

by carbonate (urethane)

links.

While

most

polyurethanes

are thermosetting polymers that do not melt when heated, thermoplastic polyurethanes are also
available. Polyurethane polymers are traditionally and most commonly formed by reacting a dior polyisocyanate with a polyol. Both the isocyanates and polyols used to make polyurethanes
contain on average two or more functional groups per molecule. The urethane polymer is formed
through the reaction between isocyanate and polyol, and tri-color-flour-methane or carbon
dioxide which is used as a blowing agent and is vaporized by the heat released by the exothermic
reaction. PUR foams are produced in many variations from soft foam with more or less open
cells to rigid types with predominantly closed cells and in densities of 30 to 500 kg/m3

20

Figure3.1:Polyurethanefoamboard
Polyurethane products often are simply called urethanes, but should not be confused
with ethyl carbonate, which is also called urethane. Polyurethanes neither contain nor are
produced from ethyl carbonate. Polyurethanes are used in the manufacture of flexible, highresilience foam seating; rigid foam insulation panels; microcellular foam seals and gaskets;
durable elastomeric wheels and tires (such as roller coaster and escalator wheels); automotive
suspension bushings; electrical potting compounds; high performance adhesives; surface
coatings and surface sealants; synthetic fibres (e.g., Spandex); carpet underlay; hard-plastic parts
(e.g., for electronic instruments); hoses and skateboard wheels.

POLY-ISOCYNURATE FOAM:
Polyisocyanurate, also referred to as PIR, polyiso, or ISO, is a thermoset plastic typically
produced as a foam and used as rigid thermal insulation. Its chemistry is similar to
polyurethane (PUR) except that the proportion of methylene dipheny disocyanate (MDI) is
higher and a polyester-derived polyol is used in the reaction instead of a polyetherpolyol.
Catalysts and additives used in PIR formulations also differ from those used in PUR. PIR is
typically produced as foam and used as rigid thermal insulation. Its thermal conductivity has a
typical value of 0.16 BTU*in/hr*ft2*F (0.023 W/(mK)) depending on the perimeter: area ratio.
PIR foam panels laminated with pure embossed aluminum foil are used for fabrication of preinsulated duct that is used for heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems. Prefabricated
PIR sandwich panels are manufactured with corrosion-protected, corrugated steel facings bonded
to a core of PIR foam and used extensively as roofing insulation and vertical walls (e.g. for
warehousing, factories, office buildings etc.). Other typical uses for PIR foams include industrial

21

and commercial pipe insulation, and carving/machining media (competing with expanded
polystyrene and rigid polyurethane foams).

Figure3.2 : Polyisocynurate foam

1.4.3 GLASS FABRIC:
Woven glass fabric is a lightweight, strong, and robust material. Although strength properties are
somewhat lower than carbon fibre and it is less stiff, the material is typically far less brittle, and
the raw materials are much less expensive. Note that woven fibreglass is much finer than woven
roving, which is a heavier glass cloth, often used for boat building in conjunction with CSM as a
simple means of adding bulk to increase stiffness. E-glass is the common, all-purpose
reinforcement while S2-glass (high-Strength), is stronger, stiffer and far more expensive. Glass
fibre is commonly used as an insulating material. It is also used as a reinforcing agent for
many polymer products;

to

form

very

strong

and

light fibre

reinforced

polymer (FRP) composite material called glass reinforced plastic (GRP), popularly known as
"fibreglass". Glass fibre has roughly comparable properties to other fibres such as polymers
and carbon fibre. Although not as strong or as rigid as carbon fibre, it is much cheaper and
significantly less brittle.

22

Figure3.3: Glass fabric (280 gsm)

Figure 3.4: Glass fabric (100 gsm)

For this project, we have used epoxy resin GY257 and hardener AD140. GY257 resin it is a
Liquid, Low-Viscosity, Biphenyl-A based Epoxy Resin, modified with reactive diluents. Its
properties are

Excellent mechanical properties and chemical resistance

Variable within wide limits by using changing hardeners and fillers
Very good processing properties
Good tendency to crystallize.

Its applications are that it is cured with polyamides, polyamidoamines or theiradducts for solvent
free coatings, flooring screeds, trowelling compounds etc.
AD 140 HARDENER:
A hardener is a substance or mixture added to a plastic composition to take part in and
promote or control the curing action, Also a substance added to control the degree of hardness of
the cured film. AD 140 hardener is generally used for reactive adhesives, castings, heat-resistant
mortars.

23

GLASS LAMINATE PROPERTIES:

The CADEC Software available in the Composite lab is used to find the various
micromechanical properties of laminate skin of sandwich composite inputs like modulus of
elasticity of, Fabric Ef, Matrix Em and the volume - Vf are given to attain values by Rule of
Mixtures, Halpin-Tsai Equation, Cylindrical Assemblage model and Stress Partitioning
equations.
Density for E-Glass Fabric = 2.52 gms/cc.
Volume Fraction of fabric in the composite = 0.3
Youngs Modulus of Elasticity, E-Glass Fabric = 35 GPa
Poisson's ratio of the E glass fibre = 0.25 + / - 0.01
RESIN PROPERTIES:
Epoxy GY 257 & Aradur 140
Density of epoxy is considered = 1.2 g /cc.

Youngs Modulus of Elasticity,

Epoxy Resin mixture = 1.5 GPa ;

Poisons ratio of the resin =0.35
FOAM PROPERTIES : The two different types of foams used here are Polyurethane and
Polyisocyanurate. The properties considered are :

Table3.1 :

PUF :Density
Youngs Modulus of
Elasticity, E1, MPa
Poissons Ratio
In Plane Shear
Modulus, G12, MPa

64 kg/m3
10.7

125 kg/m3
11

0.3
4.11

0.312
4.192

PIR : Density
Youngs Modulus of
Elasticity, E1, MPa
Poissons Ratio
In plane Shear
Modulus, G12, MPa

64 kg/m3
12

125 kg/m3
24

0.32
4.54

0.332
9
Calculation for

Fabrication Process of 125 kg/m3 density foam at4:1 panels with 10mm,25mm,50mm.
24

Foam type

PIR(125kg/m3 )

Foam thickness(mm)

10

25

50

10

25

50

Volume Fraction

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

1000*5

1000*52

500*480 1000*50

1000*520

00*25

0*50

*10

*50

Dimension

of

foam 500*480

(mm)

*10

PUF(125kg/m3 )

8(280
No. of layers

Gsm), 4
(100

24(280

22(540

gsm)

gsm)

gsm)
Volume of resin used
(cc)
Volume of hardener
used (cc)

454.24

1649.41

227.12

824.7

9.6710
(280
Gsm)

0*25
18(280
gsm),

24(600gs

2(100

m)

gsm)

3666.5

481.33

1116

4073.8

1833.26

240.86

435.6

2036.9

3.VACUUM BAGGING PROCESS:

Vacuum Bag molding is a process using a two-sided mould set that shapes both surfaces
of the panel. On the lower side is a rigid mould and on the upper side is a flexible me.mbrane or
vacuum bag. The flexible membrane can be a reusable silicone material or an extruded polymer
film. Then, vacuum is applied to the mould cavity. This process can be performed at either
ambient or elevated temperature with ambient atmospheric pressure acting upon the vacuum bag.
Most economical way is using a venturi vacuum and air compressor or a vacuum pump. A
vacuum bag is a bag made of strong rubber-coated fabric or a polymer film used to bond or
laminate materials. In some applications the bag encloses the entire material, or in other
applications a mold is used to form one face of the laminate with the bag being single sided to
seal the outer face of the laminate to the mold. The open end is sealed and the air is drawn out of
the bag through a nipple using a vacuum pump. As a result, uniform pressure approaching one
atmosphere is applied to the surfaces of the object inside the bag, holding parts together while
the adhesive cures.
25

Fig 3.5 Cross section of vacuum bagging process

Vacuum bagging is widely used in the composites industry as well. Carbon fibre fabric
and fibreglass, along with resins and epoxies are common materials laminated together with a
vacuum bag operation. Typically, polyurethane or vinyl materials are used to make the bag,
which is commonly open at both ends. This gives access to the piece, or pieces to be glued. A
plastic rod is laid onto the bag, which is then folded over the rod. A plastic sleeve with an
opening in it, is then snapped over the rod. This procedure forms a seal at both ends of the bag,
when the vacuum is ready to be drawn. A platen is used inside the bag for the piece being
glued to lay on. The platen has a series of small slots cut into it, to allow the air under it to be
evacuated. The platen must have rounded edges and corners to prevent the vacuum from tearing
the bag.
VACCUM BAGGING PROCESS FOR SANDWICH PANELS:
For 4:1 skin to core weight ratios of 125 kg/m 3 foams of varying thicknesses 10mm ,
25mm,50mm., we have calculated the number of layers required on each side. Therefore, we
need to cut out 280 gsm & 100 gsm glass fabric with required dimensions. A volume fraction of
0.3 was taken between the resin and glass fabric. The mixture of resin and hardener in the
appropriate ratio is applied on each glass fabric layer and the layers arranged accordingly. To
have proper adhesion between the layers, rolling is done alongside on each layer. The whole
sample is then inserted into a vacuum bag which is sealed at both ends. The vacuum pump is
26

switched on for half an hour. The atmospheric air pressure then acts on the panel as the bag is
evacuated. The composite is kept within the bag for a day for complete curing of the resin.

Figure3.6 :PIR -125 ,4:1(10mm) Sandwich panels kept in sealed vacuum bags for curing

Figure3.7:PUF 125 ,4:1. (50mm)Vaccum bagging technique for fabrication of sandwich

composites
27

FABRICATION OF TENSILE TEST SPECIMENS:

The tensile specimens are fabricated from two types of foam PIR AND PUF with 125
kg/m3 density with 10 mm thickness. The dimensions of the tensile specimen standards are
considered from ASTM 3039 and also ASTM D638. As the foams would get crushed between
the grips of the tensile fixture, the design is modified to suit the requirements by taking long
specimens with end grooves provided (as shown in pic),

FIG.3.8: FABRICTION OF TENSILE SPECIMEN AFTER HANDMILL GRINDING

which are inserted with glass laminates. It was seen by Chava Uday [6 ] in the study conducted
on foams of various densities, for double lap shear, that by adhesively bonding glass epoxy
laminates, exhibit high load bearing capacity. Hence the glass epoxy laminates were used to hold
the specimens between the grips of the tensile fixture in the UTM. The dimensions include
length of foam specimen 300 mm, width 25mm, thickness 10mm(approx. 10 12mm),centre
width 12.5mm and radius of curvature 8.1mm(refer fig.) .

28

FIG3.9 : grooves made at the end of specimens ,glass laminates inserted into grooves
The grooves made were of 25 mm depth and 3mm thickness to give a tight fit to the glass
laminate with epoxy bonding. Epoxy resin used for bonding was GY 257 and hardener Aradur
140. The joints were cured for 24 hours under vacuum bagging, and age cured for another 48
hours. The grooves that showed gaps in resin fills , were later filled with resin and cured again.

CHAPTER-4
4 .TESTING
INSTRON 8801 Universal Testing Machine:
The 8801 servo hydraulic testing system meets the challenging demands of a varied range of
both dynamic static and static testing requirements. The 8801 provides complete testing solutions
to satisfy the needs of advanced materials and component testing, and is ideally suited for high
29

and low-cycle fatigue testing, thermo-mechanical fatigue testing, and fracture mechanics. The
higher capacity of up to 100 kN, a larger working space, a high stiffness, and the precision of
alignment all make the 8801 an exceptionally versatile and reliable testing system. The precision
mechanical systems above combined with the advanced features of the 8800 digital controller
and Dynacell enable Instron to supply fully-integrated turnkey solutions to meet the most
demanding applications. Console Software provides full system control from a PC: including
waveform generation, calibration, limit set up, and status monitoring. Figure shows the
INSTRON 8801 testing machine.
Features of the INSTRON 8801:

Up to 100 kN (22,500 lbf) axial force capacity

Patented Dynacell load cell features compensation for inertial loads caused by heavy

grips and fixtures.

Standard or extra-height frame options.
Wide range of grips, fixtures, and accessories.

Figure 4.1: INSTRON 8801

In this project tensile test is conducted on each specimen PUF-PIR havingdensity125Kg/m 3
with thickness (10-12mm). INSTRON 8801 UTM is used for testing the specimens.The ends of
specimens glass laminates is inserted to hold the grips by fixture . telescope micrometre is used
to measure the readings of each specimen fracture and failure modes are observed while doing
the test. load v/s deflection graphs and max load values ,linear extension of specimen after the

30

specimen breaks shown in computer .the values are used for calculating poisons ratio, youngs
modulus . Failures occurs different points in each specimen as shown In the fig.

Fig4.2:PUF 125 SAMPLE before tensile test

31

Fig 4.3 Failure occur below the cente line of PIR 125kg/m3
FLEXURAL TEST: flexural test specimens of 10mm,25mm,50mm of PUF&PIR125 with
weight ratio 4:1 is considered .the test conducted on instron 8801 as shown in fig.

Fig4.4 : Testing of PIR-125-4:1-16:1 specimen

fig4.5:Testing of PUF -125-4:1-16:1

specimen

32

COMPRESSION TEST :
Compression tests of foam samples having density 125kg/m 3 is considered for finding
r ratio ,shift in neutral axis .compression test of few samples done as shown in fig

Fig 4.6:PUF125 Foam Compression Test

Fig4.7 : Experimental Set Up Of PUF& PIR Foams In Compression Test

33

THEORITICAL CALCULATIONS:

Figure 4.8: Foam core sandwich construction showing the architecture

c = Thickness of the core, mm

b = Width of the Laminate , mm
t = Thickness of Skin, mm
d = Distance between centrodial axis of two skins, mm
h = Height of the Laminate, mm
(i) Flexural rigidity

+ Es (2bt)(

)+

_______________(1)

Es=Elastic Modulus of skin in N/mm2

Ec=Elastic Modulus of core in N/mm2
d =distance between the centroidal axis of the two skins in mm
34

(ii) Shear Deflection

shear = (W.l.C)/(4.b.d2.Gc)

_________________(2)

W = Central load applied in Newton

l = Span length of the support in mm
Gc = Shear modulus of the core in N/mm2
C = Thickness of core in mm
(iii) Bending stress
__________________(3)
Bending moment, M = W.l/4 in N-m
(iv) Shear stress in core
= [(Es.t.d/2)+((Ec/2) ((c2 /4)-y2 ))] __________________(4)

Shear Force, Q=W/2 in Newton

y= any distance from the neutral axis
D=Flexural Rigidity in N-mm2
If Ec = 0, then = Q/(b.d)
(v) Shear Strain

_______________(5)

(vi) Normal Stress

35

x =

_______________(6)

Second moment of area, If =

mm4

(vii) Bending Strength

M=

N-mm

________________(7)

P=load of the specimen in Newton

a=Span length0
THEORITICAL CALCULATION
r=

Stresses in sandwich beams:

Shear stress occurs in core region

Bending stresses occurs in skin
The position of the neutral axis ,flexural rigidity, and second moment of area

calculated based on shift in neutral axis.

Tc=Q/b.d
= Mh/btd2

SHEAR FLOW DIAGRAM

36

is

COMPARISON BETWEEN COMPRESSION AND TENSILE TEST OF FOAMS PUF

&PIR:
We see a shift in neutral axis during the test toward the tensile side of the specimen.
Understanding the tensile stresses acting on the foam core of a foam core glass epoxy sandwich
laminate of a particular weight ratio, helps understand the shear flow nature in the sandwich
composites. No shift in neutral axis is find while doing compression test Given below are the
details of the compressive stress and taken by a 125 kg/cum foam in
PIR foam density observed for Compression Tests. Poissons ratio for 125 kg/m 3 is seen to be
high. Compressive stress is 1.16 MPa for PIR foam
PUF foam density observed for tensile tests .poisons ratio for 125 kg/m 3 is seen to be high
.tensile stress is 1.7 MPa for PUF foam
Compressive strength of PIR 125 is more compare to PUF 125&Tensile strength of PUF125 is
more compare to PIR125 vice versa.
Table 4.1:poisons ratio and compressive stress values for compression test
Foam
PIR 125
PUF 125

Poissons Ratio
0.3207
0.295

Compressive Stress
1.0376 MPa
0.631MPa

Table 4.2: TENSILE TEST

Foam
PIR 125
PUF 125

Poissons ratio
.06
0.205

Tensile stress
1.32
1.7
37

The poisons ratio of PUF125&PIR125 of compression test is more than that of tensile
test
Failure Modes of Sandwich Structures:
Sandwich, despite its high stiffness, should also possess high strength. There are four
different modes of failure of sandwich composites when loading in bending. The structure will
fail at the mode that occurs at the lowest load. The failure modes are:
I. Yielding or fracture of the tensile face
This type of failure occurs when the normal tensile stresses due to the tensile loading exceeds the
yield strength of the face sheet materials.

Fig4.11 : Tensile fracture of face sheets

II. Buckling or Wrinkling of the face
This method of failure occurs due to the excessive compressive stress, which causes instability in
the face sheets.

Fig 4.12 : Face sheet wrinkling

III. Failure of the core in shear

Generally the failure occurs when the shear stress in the core exceeds the shear strength. The
shear strength of the core depends on the foam density, pore size and the heat treatment
temperature.

38

Fig4.12 : Shear failure in core

IV. Failure of the bond between face and core
This failure occurs only when stresses at the interface are high enough to cause delamination.

Fig4.13 : Delamination
CALCULATIONS FOR R RATIO AND C/D RATIO:
PIR-125 :

r=

=1.32/1.0376 = 1..272

Substitue r value in c/d equation

0.007174

PUF-125:
r=

=1.7/0.631 =2.694

Substitue r value in c/d equation

0.1051

39

CHAPTER-5
5.RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:
Table 5.1 : mechanical properties of PUF &PIR125 at 4:1skin to weight ratio with thickness
10mm,25mm,50mm

Max bending stress

Flexural Rigidity
( N-mm2/mm) per

Type of foam
PIR 125

PUF 125

Foam thickness(mm)

Foam thickness(mm)

10

25

50

10

25

50

40.21

47.92

56.8

21.88

23.96

6.38

20.81

77.7

5.20

20.79

0.39

0.29

0.196

0.176

47.68

56.69

21.45

23.84

18.78

7.183

11.42

3.97

7.183

7.99

033.19

139

unit width*106
Shear Strength in 0.286
Core(N/mm2)
Normal
Stress(N/mm2)
Bending

20.39867
737

Shape 3.815

0.394

Factor for Stiffness

Shear deflection
3.62
13.14
20.82
10.29
13.11
21.69
Shear strain at max
0.0383
0.053
0.04845 0.11
0.0579
0.0050
load
COMPARISON PLOTS FOR VARIOUS FOAM THICKNESSES (PIR-125&PUF-125)
WITH VARIOUS MECHANICAL PROPERTIES:

40

Fig.no5.1. Foam thickness Vs Maximum bending stress

Fig. no5.2. Foam thickness vs. Normal stress (N/mm2)

41

Fig. no5.3. Foam thickness vs. shear strength in core

Fig. no5.4. Foam thickness vs. bending shape factor for stiffness

42

Fig no5.5:Foam thickness Vs flexural rigidity per unit width

Fig. no5.6. Foam thickness Vs Shear deflection

43

Fig. no5.7. Foam

thickness Vs Shear

strain at

max load

TENSILE BEHAVIOUR OF FOAMS UNDER INSTRON:

LOAD Vs EXTENSION PLOTS:

44

fig.no5.8. ;load vs extension plot for PIR -125 sample-1

fig.no5.9. ;load vs extension plot for PIR -125 sample-2

45

fig.no5.10. ;load vs extension plot for PIR -125 sample-3

fig.no5.11. ;load vs extension plot for PUF -125 sample-1

46

fig.no5.12. ;load vs extension plot for PUF -125 sample-2

fig.no5.13. ;load vs extension plot for PUF -125 sample-3

47

Table 5.2 Tensile Test Data:

Specimen

PIR -125

Load

196.87414

Modulus

Tensile

(Automatic

extension at

Young's)

Yield (Zero

(Mpa)

Slope)

108.838

(mm)
6.26259

Sample-1
PIR -125

Sample-3
PUF -125
Sample-1
PUF-125

Failure Above
Centre Line

139.16492

78.089

3.90598

Sample-2
PIR -125

Comment

Failure Below
2nd Line From

191.81967
212.27598
271.10577

49.902
163.287
141.547

12.22291

Centre
Failure At

3.66258

Centreline
Failure Below

7.00860

Centreline
Failure 1 Inch

Sample-2

Above Centre

PUF -125

Line
Failed Above

202.08359

77.308

11.31756

Sample-3

Centreline

OBSERVATIONS:
It is observed that while doing the tensile test failure patterns occurs at different points
from centre line the load vs extension graph shows max load and yielding takes place at point of
extension

In PIR-125 SAMPLE -1 the max load taken by the specimen 196.87 N . The failure of
specimen Is observed above the centre line at extension of 6.262 mm

In PIR-125 SAMPLE-2 the max load taken by the specimen 139.16N. The failure of
specimen is observed below 2ND line from centre line at extension of 3.905mm

48

In PIR -125 SAMPLE-3 the max load taken by the specimen 191.81 N. The failure of
specimen Is observed failure at centre .this is the perfect sample at extension

of

12.22291mm

In PUF-125 SAMPLE1 the max load taken by the specimen 212.275N. The failure of

specimen Is observed below the centre at extension of 3.6625 mm.

InPUF -125 SAMPLE 2 the max load taken by the specimen 271.105N. The failure of
specimen is observed 1INCH above the centre line at extension of 7.00860mm

In PUF-125 SAMPLE 3 the max load taken by the specimen 203.3N.The failure of
specimen is observed above centre line at extension of 11.31756mm
By observing all the specimens PUF 125 more elastic compared to PIR125 because

PUF125 having high load bearing capacity.

Tensile test of PUF125 & PIR125 foams performed for finding poisons ratio,
youngs modulus ,tensile stresses based on these values were found r ratio and c/d (shift in
neutral axis)
Table 5.3 Comparison For C/D Ratio In Tensile Foam Specimen:
RATIO TYPE
R ratio
C/D
PIR-125:

PIR-125
1.272
0.007174

PUF-125
2.694
0.1051

This concludes that the shift in neutral axis from the centroidal axis is 0.71 percent of
foam thickness &r ratio is 1.272
PUF-125:
This concludes that the shift in neutral axis from the centroidal axis is 10.6 percent of
foam thickness& r ratio is 2.694

49

Table 5.4:Shear Flow In PIR -125 And PUF -125(4:1skin To Weight Ratio)
Sample Thickness(mm)
10
25
50

Shear Flow
PIR-125
2.86
9.75
19.5

PUF-125
2.9
4.9
8.8

SHEAR FLOW: If the shearing stress fv is multiplied by thickness t, we obtain a quantity q

known as the shear flow, which represents the longitudinal force per unit length transmitted
across a section at a level y1 from the neutral axis.
Q = fv*t
The shear flow values is calculated based on max shear stress in core multiplied by thickness
PLOTS FOR SHEAR FLOW WITH VARIOUS MECHANICAL PROPERTIES:
PIR-125:

Fig no5.14: Shear flow Vs Maximum Bending Stress (N/mm2)

50

Fig no: Thickness Vs Shear flow (N/mm)

Fig No5.14: Shear Flow Vs Normal stress

51

Fig no5.15: Shear Flow Vs Bending Shape Factor

Fig No5.16: Shear Flow Vs Shear Deflection

52

Fig No5.17: Shear Flow Vs Shear Strain

Fig No5.18: Shear Flow Vs flexural rigidity per unit width

PUF 125

53

Fig No5.19: Shear Flow Vs Max Bending Stress

Fig .no5.20: Shear Flow Vs Normal Stress

54

Fig .No5.21: Shear Flow Vs Flexural Rigidity per Unit Width

Fig .no5.22: Shear Flow Vs bending shape factor

55

Fig No5.23: Shear Flow Vs Shear Deflection

Fig No5.24: Shear Flow Vs Shear Strain

56

CO RELATION OF SHEAR FLOW WITH SHIFT IN NEUTRAL AXIS:

PIR-125:

Fig no5.25:shift in neutral axisVs Shear Flow

57

PUF-125:

Fig no5.26: shift in neutral axis Vs Shear flow

CONCLUSIONS:
High flexural rigidity is one of the major factor in sandwich composites for its aerospace
applications. For this purpose, high modulus skins are combined with thick and light core
resulting in sandwich composites with maximum bending strength and stiffness and minimum
weight of core and facing material combinations.
In this project we are considering PUF 125&PIR125 having varying thickness
10mm,25mm,50mmwith skin to weight ratio 4:1 at particularly 16:1 span to depth ratio .
From the results we conclude that the flexural properties for PIR 125, such as max bending
stress, flexural rigidity ,bending shape factor , normal stress proportional to thickness by
increasing the thickness shear flow also increasing close to linearity . The flexural properties
show proportionality to shear flow.
In case of, flexural properties of PUF125, flexural rigidity is increasing with thickness but in
normal stress, increasing up to some extent and then decreasing .by increasing the thickness the

58

shear flow also increasing close to linearity and but slight variation in shear flow vs normal
stress

PIR foam density observed for Compression Tests. Poissons ratio for 125 kg/m3 is seen

to be high. Compressive stress is 1.16 MPa for PIR foam

PUF foam density observed for tensile tests poissons ratio for 125 kg/m3 is seen to be

high .tensile stress is 1.7 Mpa for PUF foam

In PIR -125 SAMPLE-3 the max load taken by the specimen 191.81 N. The failure of

specimen is observed at centre with extension of 12.22291mm

In PUF-125 SAMPLE 3 the max load taken by the specimen 203.3N.The failure of

specimen s observed above centre line at extension of 11.31756mm

PIR-125:
This concludes that the shift in neutral axis from the centroidal axis is 0.71 percent of

foam thickness & r ratio is 1.272

which can be understood in case of flexure in foam core sandwich beams.
PUF-125:
The shift in neutral axis from the centriodal axis is 10.6 percent of foam thickness& r

ratio is 2.694 in PUF 125 samples.

By observing all the specimens PUF 125 is seen to be more elastic compared to PIR 125

because PUF 125 having high load bearing capacity

From shear flow Vs shift in neutral axis plot we observed that by varying

thickness10mm,25mm,50mm. as shear flow increases the shift in neutral axis also

increases with different thickness in both PUF125 & PIR125 is observed. If the thickness
of sample is high shear flow is high and the shear properties of PUF are seen to show

better performance than PIR which is considered more stiff than PUF.
It is observed that while testing sandwich specimens failure occurs mainly through face
sheet shear and compressive core crushing in 125 kg/m3 density foam sandwich panels

59

REFERENCES:
1) Engineered Materials Handbook Desk Edition, ASM International,www.asmintl.org.
2) Rodrigo Silva- Munoz effect of transverse shear deformation on elastic response of
sandwich composite plates Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of Maine.
3) R. VijayalakshmiRao behaviour of sandwich composites under flexural and fatigue
loading: effect of variation of core density International Journal of Engineering Science
and technology (IJEST) vol. 3 no.10 October 2011, issn : 0975-5462
4) C. Borsellino a,1, L. Calabrese a,1.Experimental and numerical evaluation of sandwich
composite structures Composites Science and Technology 64 (2004) 17091715.
5) Zhao-yang ZHONG, Xing-jiang MA. Three-point bending behavior of aluminum foam
sandwich with steel paneltranscation of non ferrous metals society of china (2013)
24912495
6) Chava Uday, Ramya M, Suresh, E, Padmanabhan K. Double Lap Shear and Peel
Properties of Rigid Foam core Glass/Epoxy Skin Sandwich Composites with Different
Foam Densities. International Conference on Advances In Engineering And
Technology(2014) ISBN: 978-1-63248-028-6 doi: 10.15224/ 978-1-63248-028-6-03-64.
7) Vishakh V, Ramya M, Suresh E, Padmanabhan K Influence of foam densities and span
to depth ratios on the Flexural properties of rigid polyisocyanurate foam-glass
60

fabric/epoxy Sandwich Composite International Journal of Structural Analysis & Design

IJSAD(2014), [ISSN : 2372-4102],[31-35].
8) Surya Teja Varma CH, Ramya M, Suresh E, Padmanabhan K The Flexural Properties of
Glass Fabric/Epoxy -Rigid Polyurethane Foam Core Sandwich Composites at Different
Span to Depth Ratios and Densities International Journal of Structural Analysis &
Design IJSAD(2014), [ISSN : 2372-4102],[26-30].
9) L. J. GIBSON L. Optimization of Stiffness in Sandwich Beams with Rigid Foam
Cores Materials Science and Engineering, 67 (1984) 125-135.
10) Hemnath T. and Padmanabhan K,Fem, analysis and experimental evaluation of design
optimization for flexural strength in rigid foam core epoxy skin based sandwich
composite international journal of contemporary science engineering and technology,
serials publications, Feb (2011), issn:0976-6839,vol.2 no.1, p103.
11) Peter H. Bulla,*, Fredrik Edgren. Compressive strength after impact of CFRP-foam
core sandwich panels in marine applications Composites: Part B 35 (2004) 535541.
12) L.L. Yan a Three-point bending of sandwich beams with aluminum foam-filled
corrugated cores.materials and design 60(2014) 510519,journahomepage:www.elsevier .comss
13) P.J. Callusa, A.P. Mouritza, M.K. Bannisterb, K.H. Leongb. Tensile properties and
failure mechanisms of 3D woven GRP composites Composites: Part A 30 (1999) 1277
1287.
14) Brahmananda Pramanik, P. Raju Mantena(2012) Energy Absorption of Nano-Reinforced
and Sandwich Composites in Ballistic and Low-Velocity Punch-Shear Open Journal of
Composite Materials, 2012, 2, 87-96

61