Experimental and numerical studies of sustainable sandwich bio-composites were presented. The bio-composites were developed using plant-based materials. The laminated face sheets comprised woven hemp fabric and a tree sap–based epoxy, while the core comprised castor oil-based polyurethane foam reinforced with waste rice hulls ashes. Uniaxial compression, tension, and three-point flexural bending tests were performed. Finite element models were developed. Good agreements between experimental and numerically simulated flexural responses were found. From numerical simulation results, the sandwich bio-composites were found to be a structurally acceptable replacement for standard gypsum drywall. Further experimental works are needed to validate the applications.
FereidoonATaheriSA. Using finite element method to analyze the effect of microstructure on energy absorption properties of open cell polymeric foams. J Cell Plast2012; 48: 257–270.
2.
ZhangJLinZWongA. Constitutive modeling and material characterization of polymeric foams. J Eng Mater Technol1997; 119: 284–291.
3.
SahaMCKabirMEJeelaniS. Enhancement in thermal and mechanical properties of polyurethane foam infused with nanoparticles. Mater Sci Eng A2008; 479: 213–222.
4.
Flores-JohnsonEALiQM. Structural behaviour of composite sandwich panels with plain and fibre-reinforced foamed concrete cores and corrugated steel faces. Compos Struct2012; 94: 1555–1563.
5.
HassanNMBatraRC. Modeling damage in polymeric composites. Compos Part B Eng2008; 39: 66–82.
6.
KoYFJuJW. Effective transverse elastic moduli of three-phase hybrid fiber reinforced composites with randomly located and interacting aligned circular fibers of distinct elastic properties and sizes. Acta Mechanica2013; 224: 157–182.
7.
KoYFJuJW. New higher-order bounds on effective transverse elastic moduli of three-phase fiber reinforced composites with randomly located and interacting aligned circular fibers. Acta Mechanica2012; 223: 2437–2458.
8.
HanJBKoYFYehHY. Numerical simulations of longitudinal elastic behavior of single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT) reinforced polymer nanocomposites. J Nanomech Micromech Special Issue Mech Nanocomp Nanostruct2014; 4: A4013007–A4013007.
9.
KoYFJuJW. Effect of fiber-cracking on elastoplastic damage behavior of fiber-reinforced metal matrix composites. Int J Damage Mech2013; 22: 56–79.
10.
JuJWKoYF. Multi-level elastoplastic damage mechanics for elliptical fiber reinforced composites with evolutionary complete fiber debonding. Int J Damage Mech2009; 18: 419–460.
11.
JuJWKoYF. Micromechanical elastoplastic damage modeling of progressive interfacial arc debonding for fiber reinforced composites. Int J Damage Mech2008; 17: 307–356.
12.
JuJWKoYFRuanHN. Effective elastoplastic damage mechanics for fiber reinforced composites with evolutionary partial fiber debonding. Int J Damage Mech2008; 17: 493–537.
13.
JuJWKoYFRuanHN. Effective elastoplastic damage mechanics for fiber reinforced composites with evolutionary complete fiber debonding. Int J Damage Mech Special Issue Microstruct Damage Mech Mater2006; 15: 237–265.
14.
MinesRAWJonesN. Approximate elastic-plastic analysis of the static and impact behaviour of polymer composite sandwich beams. Composites1995; 26: 803–814.
15.
SteevesCAFleckNA. Collapse mechanisms of sandwich beams with composite faces and a foam core, loaded in three-point bending. Part I: analytical models and minimum weight design. Int J Mech Sci.2004; 46: 561–583.
16.
MamalisAGSpentzasKNManolakosDE. Experimental investigation of the collapse modes and the main crushing characteristics of composite sandwich panels subjected to flexural loading. Int J Crashworthiness2008; 13: 349–362.
17.
LimTSLeeCSLeeDG. Failure modes of foam core sandwich beams under static and impact loads. J Compos Mater2004; 38: 1639–1662.
18.
BorsellinoCCalabreseLValenzaA. Experimental and numerical evaluation of sandwich composite structures. Compos Sci Technol2004; 64: 1709–1715.
19.
SteevesCAFleckNA. Collapse mechanisms of sandwich beams with composite faces and a foam core, loaded in three-point bending. Part II: experimental investigation and numerical modelling. Int J Mech Sci2004; 46: 585–608.
20.
IvañezISantiusteCSanchez-SaezS. FEM analysis of dynamic flexural behaviour of composite sandwich beams with foam core. Compos Struct2010; 92: 2285–2291.
21.
RizovV. Failure behavior of composite sandwich structures under local loading. Arch Appl Mech2008; 79: 205–212.
MinesRAAliasA. Numerical simulation of the progressive collapse of polymer composite sandwich beams under static loading. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2002; 33: 11–26.
KabirMMWangHLauKT. Mechanical properties of chemically-treated hemp fibre reinforced sandwich composites. Compos Part B Eng2012; 43: 159–169.
30.
Mendez S, Aungyong L, Chan K, et al. Fabrication of polyurethane-based foams with incorporated “waste” glycerol from tranesterification synthesis and “waste” agricultural residues (chopped rice hull fibers). In: AIChE national conference. San Francisco, CA, USA: November 2013, pp.1–8.
31.
ASTM Standard D7250: 2012. Standard practice for determining sandwich beam flexural and shear stiffness. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2012, www.astm.org.
32.
ASTM Standard D3575: 2008. Standard test methods for flexible cellular materials made from olefin polymers. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2008, www.astm.org.
33.
ASTM Standard D3039: 2008. Standard test method for tensile properties of polymer matrix composite materials. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2008, www.astm.org.
34.
ASTM Standard C473: 2012. Standard test methods for physical testing of gypsum panel products. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2012, www.astm.org.
35.
ASTM Standard C1396: 2013. Standard specification for gypsum board. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2013, www.astm.org.
36.
Chan K. Development, testing, and numerical modeling of a foam sandwich biocomposite. Master Thesis, California State University, Long Beach, USA, 2014.
