Acta mater. Vol. 47, No. 10, pp.

2853±2863, 1999
# 1999 Acta Metallurgica Inc.
Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
PII: S1359-6454(99)00150-0 1359-6454/99 $20.00 + 0.00

OVERVIEW NO. 132:

THE CREEP OF CELLULAR SOLIDS
E.W. ANDREWS1, L.J. GIBSON1{ and M.F. ASHBY2
1
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,
MA 02139, U.S.A. and 2Micromechanics Centre, Cambridge University Engineering Department,
Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, U.K.

(Received 1 April 1999; accepted 6 May 1999)

AbstractÐHoneycombs and foams, loaded at low temperatures (T < 0.3Tm), deform by the elastic de¯ec-
tion, elastic buckling and plastic collapse of their cell walls. At more elevated temperatures, creep contrib-
utes to the deformation, which becomes time-dependent. In this paper we develop expressions for the
creep-bending of cell walls allowing the creep rate of honeycombs and foams to be predicted from the cell-
wall properties and relative density. The analysis follows the general approach [1] of Gibson and Ashby
(Cellular Solids, Structure and Properties. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997), extending it to
time-dependent deformation. To assess the validity of the model, a set of creep experiments was carried
out on an open-cell aluminum foam. The analysis gives a good description of the experimental results. #
1999 Acta Metallurgica Inc. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Creep; Foams; Aluminum

1. INTRODUCTION the others at an angle 2y to the x1 axis. The honey-

Honeycombs and foams are frequently used in
structural applications: as cores for sandwich struc-
tures, as load-bearing insulation, and as packaging
for damage-critical components. Loaded at low
temperatures (T < 0.3Tm, where Tm is the melting
point) these materials deform by the elastic de¯ec-
tion, elastic buckling and plastic collapse of their
cell walls. At more elevated temperatures, creep
contributes to the deformation, which becomes
time-dependent. Creep is a problem when foams
carry loads for long periods of time at elevated tem-
peraturesÐrefractory brick in furnace walls, met-
allic foams in high-temperature ®lters, and polymer
foams used in sandwich panels (even at room tem-
perature)Ðare examples. More speci®cally, the
recent advances in the manufacture of metal foams,
and the interest in their use as cores for high-tem-
perature sandwich structures, impels a fuller under-
standing of their creep behaviour. In this paper we
develop expressions for the creep rate of honey-
combs and foams, extending the general approach
of Gibson and Ashby [1], to time-dependent defor-
mation. An experimental study of the creep of an
open-cell aluminum foam is compared with the ana-
lytical results: the analysis describes the data well.
2. CREEP OF HONEYCOMBS
Figure 1(a) shows a honeycomb. The cell walls
have thickness t. One set lies parallel to the x2 axis,
{To whom all correspondence should be addressed.
2853
comb is loaded in-plane. We ®rst consider the sec-
ondary creep rate of the structure when subjected
to compressive or tensile stress in the x1 or the x2
direction. The deformation arises from the bending
de¯ection of the inclined cell walls.
Consider the creep of the inclined cell walls
loaded as in Fig. 1. Let the creep rate e_ of the cell
wall material under a uniaxial stress s be described
by the equation
 n
s
e_ ˆ e_ 0 …1†
s0
where e_ 0 , s0 and n are constants characterizing the
creep of the solid material of which the cell walls
are made. The parameter e_ 0 incorporates the tem-
perature dependency through the Arrhenius re-
lationship
 
Q
_e0 ˆ C exp ÿ
RT
where C is a constant, Q is the activation energy
for the creep process, R is the gas constant and T is
the absolute temperature. A well-known feature of
this equation, exploited later, is that in the limit
n = 1 the equation reduces to that for linear elas-
ticity (with e_ replaced by strain e and s0 =_e1=n
0 by the
solid Young's modulus, E); and in the limit n 4 1,
it reduces to that for perfect plasticity (with s0 set
equal to the solid yield strength sy). These limits
allow results for the linear-elastic and fully-plastic
deformation of honeycombs to be recovered from
2854 ANDREWS et al.: OVERVIEW NO. 132

Fig. 1. A honeycomb: (a) undeformed, (b) loaded in the x1 direction, (c) loaded in the x2 direction and
(d) loaded in shear. When loaded at an elevated temperature, the inclined cell walls su€er creep-bending.

that for creep, permitting links to be made with gives the stress distribution
known solutions for these limits.  1=n
We wish to calculate the de¯ection rate d_ of the yk_
s… y† ˆ s0 :
inclined walls, from which the macroscopic strain e_ 0
rate can be derived. To achieve this, we treat the
Inserting this into equation (2), integrating and
cell wall as a beam loaded in bending (Fig. 2), and
inverting gives the key equation for any creeping-
make three standard assumptions: that the bending
beam problem:
displacements are small; that the neutral axis lies in
      
the plane of symmetry of the beam section; and 2n ‡ 1 M n 2 2n‡1 M n
that plane sections remain plane. Equilibrium k_ ˆ e_ 0 ˆ k_ 0 …3†
2n bs0 t M0
requires that the bending moment M carried by the
beam be related to the longitudinal stress within it, with
s(y), by: 2_e0
… t=2 k_ 0 ˆ …4†
t
M ˆ 2b ys… y†dy: …2†
0 and
Compatibility requires that the strain rate e_ … y† at  
2n s0 bt2
any point in the section be related to the rate of M0 ˆ : …5†
2n ‡ 1 4
_ by
change of curvature, k,
Using the limits listed below equation (1) we ®nd
e_ … y† ˆ yk:
_
that equation (3) correctly reduces, in the linear-
Substituting this into the creep law of equation (1) elastic limit, to
 ANDREWS et al.: OVERVIEW NO. 132 2855

in the x1 direction, we ®nd the force resolved nor-

mal to the wall, causing it to bend, to be
F ˆ s*1 …h ‡ `siny†bsiny:

Inserting this into equation (6) gives the de¯ection

rate of the wall, the resolved part of which, parallel
to x1, leads to the remote strain rate
_ 
dsiny
e_ *1 ˆ :
`cosy
Assembling these results gives:
Fig. 2. A cell wall loaded in bending such that the ends of  2n‡1
the beam are constrained not to rotate.
e_ *1 1 `
ˆ
e_ 0 …n ‡ 2† t
  n
M 2n ‡ 1 s*1 h siny
kˆ  siny ‡ siny : …7a†
EI n s0 ` cosy
where I = bt3/12 is the second moment of area of In the ``n = 1'' limit, this correctly reduces to the
the wall. Note that the bending moment is positive result given by Gibson and Ashby [1] (p. 102,
for tension on the top face of the beam. In the limit equation 4.7)
n 4 1 it reduces instead to  3
E *1 t cosy
sy bt2 ˆ
Mˆ E ` …h=` ‡ siny†sin2 y
4
and in the limit ``n 4 1 '' to the result (p. 111,
which correctly describes the plastic moment of the
equation 4.24)
wall.
Consider now the creep deformation of a honey-
comb loaded in the x1 direction, as shown in
Fig. 1(b). We ®rst calculate the de¯ection rate of a
beam of length `, loaded as in Fig. 2, where the
ends of the beam are constrained not to rotate. The
moment at any section is
M…x† ˆ ÿFx

where F is the shear force at the midpoint of the

beam and x is measured from the midpoint. The
rate of change of de¯ection d…x†_ is related to the
_
curvature rate, k…x†, at the point x by
_
d2 d…x†
_
ˆ k…x†
dx 2
_
where the de¯ection rate d…x† is measured parallel
to the y-axis. Substituting these two results into
equation (3) and integrating twice, noting that
_
dd…x†=dx _
and d…x† are both zero at x = ÿ`/2 gives

1 k_ 0 F n `n‡2
d_ ˆ
n ‡ 2 M n0 2n‡1

from which
  
1 `2 2n ‡ 1 F` n
d_ ˆ e_ 0 …6†
n‡2 t n s0 bt2
which correctly reduces to the result for plastic fail-
ure of the beam in the limit of n 4 1, and to that
for its elastic de¯ection in the limit of n = 1.
We now use this result to calculate the de¯ection
rate of the inclined cell walls of Fig. 1(b), and, from Fig. 3. An open- and a closed-cell foam, showing dimen-
this, the strain rate in the honeycomb. For loading sions.
2856 ANDREWS et al.: OVERVIEW NO. 132
 2
s*1 t 1 paring the ``elastic'' and the ``fully-plastic'' limits
ˆ : with known solutions.
sy ` 2…h=` ‡ siny†siny
High-temperature deformation of open-celled
For loading in the x2 direction, we have instead foams involves the ¯exural creep of the cell walls,
just as it does in honeycombs. The analysis follows
F ˆ s*2 b`cos2 y
the derivation of Section 2 as far as (and including)
leading to a remote strain rate equation (6). ButÐbecause of the complexity of cell
  geometryÐwe now relate the remote stress s* and
_
dcosy
e_ *2 ˆ : strain rate e_ * to the load F and the displacement
h ‡ `siny rate d_ of the cell wall by dimensional arguments,
_
setting F A s`2, e_ * Ad=`, and the relative density r*/
This then gives: 2
r A (t/`) . For open-cell foams, this gives
 2n‡1  n  
e_ *2 1 ` 2n ‡ 1 s*2 cosy  n  …3n‡1†=2
ˆ cos2 y : e_ * C4 C5 …2n ‡ 1† s* r
e_ 0 …n ‡ 2† t n s0 h=` ‡ siny ˆ …8†
e_ 0 …n ‡ 2† n s0 r*
…7b†
In the ``n = 1'' limit this correctly reduces to the where C4 and C5 are constants. They are found by
result given by Gibson and Ashby [1] (p. 103, considering two limits. At the limit of n 4 1 (with
equation 4.11) s0 replaced by sy) the equation reduces to that for
plastic collapse:
 3  
E *2 t h=` ‡ siny  3=2
ˆ s* 1 r*
E ` cos3 y ˆ
sy 2C5 r
and in the limit ``n 4 1 '' to the result (p. 113,
equation 4.28) (best seen by taking the 1/n root of equation (8),
then letting n 4 1). Comparing this with the result
 2 given by Gibson and Ashby [1] (p. 206, equation
s*2 t 1
ˆ 5.27(a)), namely
sy ` 2cos2 y
 * 3=2
which is the result for fully plastic deformation of s* r
the honeycomb. 10:3
sy r
Shear deformation under a shear stress t*, giving
a shear strain rate g_ * , is treated in a similar way, we ®nd that C5 = 1.7. At the other limit of n = 1
giving
 2n‡1  n  
g_ * 1 ` 2…2n ‡ 1† t* h …h=`†…1 ‡ 2h=`†
ˆ cosy …7c†
e_ 0 2…n ‡ 2† t n s0 ` h=` ‡ siny

which, like the other results, has the proper limits (with s=_e* replaced by E* and s=_e0 replaced by E)
at n = 1 and n 4 1 given by Gibson and Ashby [1] the equation reduces to that for linear elasticity:
(equations 4.17 and 4.29a).
Equations (7a), (7b) and (7c) are the important  2
E* 1 r*
results. The secondary strain rate of the honeycomb ˆ :
E C4 C5 r
depends on the stress s and e_ 0 in the same way as
the solid so that the honeycomb has the same Comparing this with the result given by Gibson and
power law exponent, n, and activation energy, Q, as Ashby [1] (p. 189 equation 5.6(a)), namely
the solid. Note that the strain rate is highly sensitive
to the honeycomb density, varying as (t/`)ÿ2nÿ1 or  * 2
E* r
relative density raised to the power (ÿ2nÿ1). In the 1
E r
next section we extend the analysis to the creep of
foams. we ®nd that C4 = 0.6. The ®nal equation for the
creep of open-cell foams then becomes:
3. CREEP OF FOAMS
 n  …3n‡1†=2
Foams, like honeycombs, creep when loaded at e_ * 0:6 1:7…2n ‡ 1† s* r
ˆ : …9a†
elevated temperatures. Figure 3 shows, schemati- e_ 0 …n ‡ 2† n s0 r*
cally, an open- and a closed-cell foam. Real cell
shapes are, of course, more complicated, but the The analagous result for shear deformation is
forms of the equations for creep can be found by  n  …3n‡1†=2
analyzing these simpli®ed structures, and the miss- g_ * 0:9 3…2n ‡ 1† t* r
ˆ …9b†
ing constants of proportionality then set by com- e_ 0 …n ‡ 2† n s0 r*
 ANDREWS et al.: OVERVIEW NO. 132 2857

Fig. 4. Open-cell aluminum foam (Duocel, ERG, Oakland, CA) used in the creep tests. Nominal rela-
8 tive densities of (a) 6%, (b) 9% and (c) 14%. 9n
>
> >
>
> >
e_ * < s* =s0 =
ˆ      …11†
e_ 0 >> 1 n ‡ 2 1=n n r* 3n ‡ 1 2 r* >
>
>
: f ‡ …1 ÿ f† > ;
1:7 0:6 2n ‡ 1 r 2n 3 r

where g_ * is the shear strain rate and t* the remote
shear stress.
As for honeycombs, the secondary strain rate of
foams depends on the stress s and e_ 0 in the same
way as the solid so that the foam has the same
power law exponent, n, and activation energy, Q, as
the solid. The strain rate is highly sensitive to the
foam density, varying as (r*/r)ÿ(3n + 1)/2.
Closed-cell foams [Fig. 3(b)] have faces which
carry membrane stresses when the foam deforms. If
the faces are ¯at, the membrane stress in them
scales as s*`/tf (where tf is the face thickness) caus-
ing it to strain at a rate:
 * n
s `
e_ 1_e0 : creep (see, for example, Ref. [7]). The measurements
s0 tf
If all the material of the foam was contained in the
faces the strain rate of the foam as a whole would
be proportional to this e_ . In uniaxial deformation,
roughly two-thirds of the faces carry tensile stress
and must stretch in creep, giving, for the ideal
closed-cell foam [for which r*/r A (tf/`)]
 * n
3s `
e_ * ˆ e_ 0 : …10†
2 s0 tf
But this is seldom, if ever, the case. It is more rea-
listic to suppose that a fraction f of the solid is
contained in cell edges, and the rest is in the faces.
The response is then analyzed by equating the work
rate Fd_ to the energy dissipation rate in bending
and stretching the cell edges and faces in a way
which parallels that used by Gibson and Ashby [1]
to evaluate yield, giving
When all the solid is in the cell edges (f = 1), the
equation reduces to equations (9a) and (b). But
when the faces are ¯at and of uniform thickness,
(f = 0), it reduces instead to equation (10).
4. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF CREEP OF FOAMS
4.1. Materials and methods
Although many polymer, metal and ceramic
foams have been tested in the creep range [2±6] few
of the studies are suciently detailed to allow a test
of the equations developed above. Flexible foams
su€er a permanent ``compression set'' when loaded
for long periods of time, which must be caused by
of Goretta et al. [6] characterize the compressive
creep of an open-cell alumina foam in the tempera-
ture range 1200±15008C. At low stresses, creep
occurred by di€usional ¯ow, with a creep exponent
n of 1 2 0.1, and an activation energy within the
range commonly reported for creep of bulk
alumina. This is consistent with equation (7a),
which, for a creep exponent of 1 2 0.1, predicts a
dependence of creep rate on density such that
 220:15
e_ * r
A * :
e_ 0 r
Goretta et al. [6] observed an exponent of 1.8. At
higher stresses the creep rate accelerated rapidly,
suggesting the possibility of damage or creep-buck-
ling.
To assess the validity of the above analysis, a set
of creep experiments was carried out on a commer-
2858 ANDREWS et al.: OVERVIEW NO. 132
Fig. 5. Results of creep tests on solid 6101-T6 aluminum.
Secondary strain rate plotted against (a) stress at constant
temperature T = 2758C, giving n = 4.0 and (b) 1/T at
constant stress s = 22.1 MPa, giving Q = 173 kJ/mol.
cially available open-cell aluminum foam (trade
name Duocel, ERG, Oakland, CA). The main ap-
plication of this material is in heat exchangers.
Because of its uniformity in cell size, shape and
orientation it is often thought of as almost an
``ideal'' foam. Its properties (e.g. elastic modulus,
compressive strength and multiaxial yield) are well
described by existing models for open-cell foams [8±
11]. The specimens had nominal relative densities of
6%, 9% and 14%. The measured densities of the
specimens were 6.2 (0.2), 8.6 (0.4) and 13.7 (0.5)%
(mean and standard deviation). Since creep rates
are sensitive to foam density [equations (9a) and
(b)], specimens in the as-received batch with den-
sities signi®cantly di€erent from the nominal values
were not tested. The specimens all had a nominal
cell size of 40 pores per inch (ppi). In practice, the
cells are elliptical in shape with major and minor
axes of approximately 2.5 mm and 1.5 mm. The ani-
sotropy in cell shape results in anisotropic mechan-
ical properties; in this study, all of the specimens
were loaded parallel to the major cell axis. Images
showing the structure of the foams are shown in
Fig. 4.
The solid making up the foam is a 6101-T6
aluminum alloy (0.6 Mg±0.5 Si). This alloy is com-
monly used for high-strength bus bars, electrical
Fig. 6. Typical creep curves for the 9% dense open-cell
aluminum foam for (a) tension and (b) compression.
conductors and heat sinks, and is weaker than more
commonly used structural aluminum alloys. For
example, 6101-T6 aluminum has a yield strength of
193 MPa compared to 276 MPa for a 6061-T6
alloy. Because it is not a structural aluminum alloy,
the literature on its mechanical properties is sparse.
In particular, we were unable to ®nd any data on
creep of solid 6101-T6 aluminum which is needed
to assess the validity of the creep model. Therefore,
a series of experiments was performed on the solid
alloy. A piece of 25 mm  12.5 mm bar was
obtained in the as-extruded condition from the
same manufacturer as the foam (ERG, Oakland,
CA) and then heat treated to the T6 condition.
Cylindrical test specimens were machined to 9.5 mm
diameter and 19.0 mm height. One of the specimens
was tested in monotonic compression to verify its
yield strength: the measured value of 186 MPa com-
pares well with the handbook value of 193 MPa for
6101-T6 [12].
Parallelpiped foam creep specimens were cut to
25 mm  25 mm  50 mm by the manufacturer and
tested in the as-received condition. The creep tests
were carried out in air in a creep frame with a
three-zone furnace (Applied Test Systems, Butler,
PA) and a control system which maintained the
temperature to a constant value within 18C
 ANDREWS et al.: OVERVIEW NO. 132
Fig. 7. Image showing tensile failure mode for 9% dense foam.
(Omega, Stamford, CT). Displacements were
measured with an LVDT (Sensotec, Columbus,
OH) which was accurate to 20.0025 mm and had a
span of 10 mm. The LVDT was attached to the
creep frame in such a way that although it
measured the relative displacement of the specimen
ends, it remained outside the furnace. Compression
specimens were compressed between two alumina
platens. Tension specimens were bonded to stainless
steel grip pieces with an aluminum oxide-based
cement (Sauereisen, Pittsburg, PA). Care was taken
to ensure that the top and bottom grip pieces were
well aligned with each other. The bond strength of
the adhesive was sucient to avoid bond failure.
Failure occurred in the gauge section of the speci-
men in nearly all of the tests.
A constant load was applied to the sample using
dead-weight loading, accurate to within 0.01 N. The
upper part of the load train was attached to the
lever arm using a knife-edge arrangement, while the
lower part was secured to the frame using a nut
and a washer with a spherical seat. This compen-
sated for any misalignments in the system and
ensured that the loading was very nearly either
direct tension or compression. Before the load was
applied to the specimen the temperature within the
furnace was allowed to equilibrate for at least one
hour.
The steady state, or secondary creep rate and the
time to failure were assessed for each specimen
tested. The measured data for displacement as a
2859
function of time were converted to strain vs time by
dividing the displacement by the original specimen
height. The secondary creep rate was found using a
computer program which calculated the average dis-
placement over a given time interval, smoothing out
any noise in the experimental trace, and then nu-
merically di€erentiated the strain vs time data to
obtain strain rate vs time. The secondary strain rate
was taken to be the minimum strain rate computed
by the program. An alternate technique is to ®t a
straight line to the strain±time plot during the sec-
ondary creep period; both methods gave nearly
identical results with the minimum strain rate tech-
nique providing slightly lower values. The speci-
mens were taken to failure in all but the slowest
tests.
The exponent n and the activation energy for
creep Q were found from systematic sets of tests
holding, respectively, the temperature T or the
stress s constant. The exponent n was found from
the slope of a plot of log (_ess ) against log (s). The
activation energy Q was found from a plot of log
(_ess ) against 1/T; the slope of a plot of this kind is
ÿQ/R, where R is the gas constant (8.314 kJ/mol-
K). Creep tests on the solid 6101-T6 aluminum
were carried out at stresses ranging from 22.1 to
44.0 MPa and at temperatures from 2758C to
3258C. For the foamed material, the stresses were
varied over the range 0.25±0.68 MPa and the tem-
peratures, over the range 275±3508C. We note that
the uniaxial compressive strength of the 6±7%
2860 ANDREWS et al.: OVERVIEW NO. 132

Fig. 8. (a) Strain±time plot for a creep test stopped during the initial tertiary regime of increasing strain
rate. The images in (b) and (c) show the compressive failure mode. The arrows in (b) indicate the pos-
ition of the collapse band (relative density = 9%).

dense foam, loaded parallel to the major cell axis,
at room temperature is 1.4±1.8 MPa [8, 9].
Typically, the test duration varied from as short as
0.03 h to as long as 80 h.
4.2. Results
The results of the creep tests on the solid material
are shown in Fig. 5. Figure 5(a) plots the secondary
creep strain rate as a function of stress level, at a
constant temperature of 2758C; the measured creep
exponent n = 4.0. Figure 5(b) plots the secondary
creep strain rate as a function of temperature, at a
constant stress of 22.1 MPa; the measured activia-
tion energy Q = 173 kJ/mol.
Typical plots of strain against time for the alumi-
num foam loaded in tension and compression are
shown in Fig. 6. The tensile response follows typical
creep behavior, with the well-known primary, sec-
ondary and tertiary creep regimes; the tertiary
regime is terminated by rupture (see, for example,
Ref. [13]). Tensile creep specimens typically rup-
tured at an angle of 458 to the loading direction, as
 ANDREWS et al.: OVERVIEW NO. 132
Fig. 9. (a) Secondary strain rate plotted against (a) stress
at constant temperature T = 2758C and (b) 1/T at con-
stant stress s = 0.42 MPa for the 9% dense samples.
shown in Fig. 7. The compressive response is some-
what di€erent. Following the secondary regime, the
creep rate increased over some period of time and
then decreased to a lower rate, close to the original
secondary rate. The increase in strain rate is
believed to correspond to the collapse of a layer of
cells. Once this layer has densi®ed, further second-
ary creep occurs throughout the specimen, away
from the local crush band, leading to the sub-
sequent decreased strain rate. To investigate this
idea, a creep test was stopped during the regime of
increased strain rate and the specimen was removed
from the furnace. The strain±time plot for this test
and two images of the recovered specimen are
shown in Fig. 8. A layer of cells has collapsed; the
failure is highly localized. As further evidence for
this mode of failure, we note that in a typical test
the displacement associated with the increase in
strain rate was observed to be approximately 3 mm,
close to the cell size for this material. For the ten-
sion tests the failure time was de®ned as the time at
which the specimen ruptured or completely separ-
ated. For the compression tests, it was dicult to
de®ne precisely when failure occurred because the
failure was typically a gradual process. Here, for
consistency, we de®ne failure time in compression
2861
Fig. 10. Secondary strain rate plotted against (a) stress at
constant temperature T = 2758C and (b) 1/T at constant
stress s = 0.42 MPa for di€erent relative densities.
as the time at which the instantaneous strain rate is
equal to ®ve times the minimum or steady state
value. The failure times for tension and com-
pression are noted on the plots in Fig. 6.
Data for the secondary creep strain rate are
plotted in Figs 9±11. Figure 9(a) shows log (_ess )
plotted against log (s) for the 9% dense foams
tested at 2758C, for both tension and compression.
The tensile and compressive data are similar, with
n = 5.0 in tension and n = 4.2 in compression. The
average value of n for the foam (n = 4.6), is some-
what larger than that for the solid (n = 4.0). Figure
9(b) shows log (_ess ) plotted against 1/T for the 9%
dense foams, tested at 0.42 MPa, for both tension
and compression. The tensile and compressive data
are again similar, with Q = 226 kJ/mol in tension
and Q = 203 kJ/mol in compression; the values are
somewhat higher than that for the solid
(Q = 173 kJ/mol).
The e€ect of variation of foam density on the
secondary creep rate in compression is shown in
Fig. 10. The power-law creep exponent n for rela-
tive densities of 6%, 9% and 14% are 4.8, 4.2 and
3.5, respectively; the average value is 4.2, close to
that for the solid. There appears to be a trend that
the power decreases as the relative density
2862 ANDREWS et al.: OVERVIEW NO. 132

Fig. 11. Secondary strain rate plotted against relative den-
sity at constant temperature T = 2758C and stress
s = 0.42 MPa. The dashed line is a plot of equations (9a)
and (b) with n = 4.0, C4 = 0.6 and C5 = 1.7. The creep
properties of the solid were determined from the data
shown in Fig. 5.
Fig. 12. Time to failure (rupture time or collapse time)
plotted against secondary creep strain rate for the 9%
dense open-cell aluminum foam. The solid line indicates
the best ®t to the data, giving Monkman±Grant par-
ameters of m = 0.93 and B = ÿ2.029 for the tension tests
and m = 0.80 and B = ÿ1.103 for the compression tests.

increasesÐthe reason for this is not apparent. The while for the compression tests m = 0.90, 0.80 and
0.78 and B = ÿ2.039, ÿ1.103 and ÿ0.968 for the 6,
activation energies for relative densities of 6%, 9%
and 14% are 157, 203 and 186 kJ/mol, respectively, 9 and 14% dense foams, respectively. These results
indicate that the lifetime under creep conditions
all fairly close to that for the solid. The model
(tension or compression) is nearly proportional to
[equations (9a) and (b)] is compared with data for
the strain rate as a function of foam relative density the inverse of the creep strain rate. The good ®t to
the line indicates that if the creep rate is known, the
in Fig. 11. At constant temperature and stress
lifetime can be predicted quite accurately.
equations (9a) and (b) suggests that the creep rate
varies with the inverse of relative density raised to
the power (3n + 1)/2. Taking the value of n for the 5. CONCLUSIONS
solid to be 4, equations (9a) and (b) predicts a slope
of ÿ6.5, in good agreement with the data (slo- An analytical model for the power-law creep of
pe = ÿ6.4). The measured strain rates are lower honeycombs and foams has been developed. The
than those predicted by the model using the values model indicates that a foam should have the same
C4 = 0.6 and C5 = 1.7. Previous studies have activation energy, Q, and power law creep expo-
observed that this foam is transversely isotropic and nent, n, as the solid material from which it is made,
that models for the Young's modulus and strength and that the creep rate depends on the inverse of
give a good estimate of the average properties in the relative density raised to the power (3n + 1)/2.
the two directions [9]. In this study, the specimens To assess the validity of the model, an experimental
were loaded in the sti€er, stronger direction: we creep study of a commercially available open-cell
speculate that anisotropy is responsible for the dis- aluminum foam has been carried out. In addition,
crepancy between the data and the model.
Figure 12 shows a comparison between the time
to failure for the tension and compression tests on
the 9% dense foam. It can be seen that the failure
times are very close for both tension and com-
pression, despite the dramatically di€erent failure
mechanisms. Figure 13 shows a comparison
between the time to failure in compression for three
di€erent densities: 6, 9 and 14%. The times to fail-
ure are similar, but at a given creep strain rate, the
lower density foams have a shorter lifetime. The
failure times all follow the Monkman±Grant
relationship [14, 15]:
logtr ‡ mlog_e ˆ B: …12†
Fig. 13. Time to failure (collapse time) plotted against sec-
We ®nd that the best ®t to the data for the tension ondary creep strain rate for the 6%, 9% and 14% dense
tests is obtained for m = 0.93 and B = ÿ2.029, foams.
 ANDREWS et al.: OVERVIEW NO. 132
creep tests were performed on the solid material
from which the foam was made. The creep behavior
of the foam was found to be in excellent agreement
with the existing model: the activation energy for
creep and the power-law creep exponent were very
close to those of the solid and the dependence of
creep rate on relative density was almost exactly
that expected. Time to failure is well described
using the Monkman±Grant relationship [14]. We
believe that the reason the model describes the
creep behaviour of this foam so well is that the
foam structure is highly homogeneousÐboth the
cell size and cell orientation show little variation
throughout the foam.
AcknowledgementsÐWe wish to acknowledge the always-
valuable inputs of J.W. Hutchinson, A.G. Evans, A.C.F.
Cocks and N.A. Fleck, the support of the British
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
(EPSRC) through the Engineering Design Centre in the
Cambridge University Engineering Department, and that
of the U.S. Advance Research Project Agency through the
Multi-University Research Initiative (MURI) under the
Oce of Naval Research Contract No. N-00014-1-96-
1028.
2863
REFERENCES
1. Gibson, L.J. and Ashby, M.F., Cellular Solids,
Structure and Properties. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1997.
2. Brown, W.B., Plastics Prog., 1960, 149.
3. Hart, G.M., Balazs, C.F. and Clipper, R.B., J. Cell.
Plast., 1973, 9, 139.
4. Thornton, P.H. and Magee, C.L., Metall. Trans.,
1975, 6A, 1253.
5. Campbell, G.A., J. appl. Polymer Sci., 1979, 24, 709.
6. Goretta, K.C., Brezny, R., Dam, C.Q., Green, D.J.,
De Arellano-Lopez, A.R. and Dominguez-Rodriguez,
A., Mater. Sci. Engng, 1990, A124, 151.
7. Meinecke, E.A. and Clark, R.E., Mechanical
Properties of Polymeric Foams. Technomic Publishing,
Stamford, CT, 1972.
8. Sugimura, Y., Meyer, J., He, M.Y., Bart-Smith, H.,
Grenstedt, J. and Evans, A.G., Acta mater., 1997, 45,
5245.
9. Andrews, E.W., Sanders, W. and Gibson, L.J., Mater.
Sci. Engng, in press.
10. Gioux, G., McCormack, T.M. and Gibson, L.J., Int.
J. Mech. Sci., in press.
11. Deshpande, V.S. and Fleck, N.A., J. Mech. Phys.
Solids, in press.
12. American Society of Metals, Aluminum and Aluminum
Alloys. ASM International, Materials Park, OH.
13. Evans, H.E., Mechanisms of Creep Fracture. Elsevier
Applied Science, London, 1984.
14. Monkman, F.C. and Grant, N.J., Proc. ASTM, 1956,
56, 593.
15. Finnie, I. and Heller, W.R., Creep of Engineering
Materials. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959.