Polymer Foams

terials containing gaseous voids surrounded by a denser matrix

Foams have been widely used in a variety of applications: Insulation,
cushion,
absorbents, etc .
Various polymers have been used for foam applications:
Polyurethane (PU), polystyrene (PS), polyethylene (PE),
polypropylene (PP), poly(vinyl chloride) (PVC), polycarbonate (PC),
etc.
Polyurethane occupies the largest market share (53%) in terms of
amount consumed, while polystyrene is the second (26%). Plastic
foams had a market valueof US $2 billion in 2000.
Lee L. J. Et al. Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005) 2344-2363

Advantageou
s

hey have low density so they are light weight materials.

ome polymer foams have low heat or sound transfer, making them optimal insula
any are flexible and soft, meaning they provide more comfort as cushion.

Disadvantageous
Inferior mechanical strength
Low thermal and dimensional stability
The most widely used chloroflorocarbon (CFC) blowing agents have
been found to cause ozone depletion in the upper atmosphere and
banned by 2010 according to Montreal Protocol.

Classification of Polymer Foams

Polymer foams can also be defined as either closed cell or
open cell foams.
In closed cell foams, the foam cells are isolated from each other
and cavities are surrounded by complete cell walls. Generally, closed
cell foams have lower permeability, leading to better insulation
properties. Absorb sound, especially bass tones. Closed cell foams
are usually characterized by their rigidity and strength, in addition to
the high R-value (Resistance to heat flow).
Closed cell polyurethane spray foam has among the highest R-values
of
commercially
In any
open
cell foams,available
cells areinsulation.
connected with each other. They have
softer and spongier appearance. Open cell foams are incredibly
effective as a sound barrier in normal noise frequency ranges and
provide better absorptive capability.
The advantages of closed-cell foam compared to open-cell foam
include its strength, higher R-value, and its greater resistance to the
leakage of air or water vapor. The disadvantage of the closed-cell
foam is that it is denser, requires more material, and therefore, is
more expensive.

Fig. 1 Examples of cellular solids:

a) open-cell polyurethane foam,
b) closed-cell polyethylene foam.

Classification of Polymer Foams

Polymer foams can be classified as rigid or flexible foams

Rigid foams are widely used in

applications such as building
insulation, appliances,
transportation, packaging, furniture,
food and drink containers.
Flexible PU

Rigid PU foam panels

Flexible foams are used as furniture,

transportation, bedding, carpet underlay,
textile, sports applications, shock and sound
attenuation.

Classification of Polymer Foams

According to the size of the foam cells, polymer foams can be
classified as:
Macrocellular (>100 m),
Microcellular (1100 m),
Ultramicrocellular (0.11 m)
Nanocellular (0.1100 nm).
Bayer MaterialScience
is
working
on
the
development
of
polyurethane
nanofoams.
The
thermal
insulation
performance of a polyurethane
rigid foam depends chiefly on
the size of the foam pores. The
smaller the diameter, the lower
the thermal conductivity and
the better the insulating effect.
Today's
polyurethane
rigid
foams typically have pore sizes

Foaming Techniques
1- Mechanical Foaming
2- Foaming with Hollow Glass Beads
3- Chemical Foaming
4- Physical Foaming

Foaming agents are substances that form the gaseous phase in the
foams.
For large scale production, the direct utilization of foaming agents is the most
commonly used method.
Two types of foaming agents are often used:
Chemical blowing agents: They are usually reactive species that
produce gases in the foaming process. Blowing agents that produce
gas via chemical reactions include baking powder and isocyanates;
when they react with water; RNCO + H2O RNH2 + CO2
Physical blowing agents: They are substances that gasify under
foaming conditions. Typical physical foaming agents are volatile
chemicals such as chlorofluorocarons (CFC), volatile hydrocarbons
and alcohols, or inert gases such as nitrogen, carbon dioxide,

In physical foaming, a blowing gas is first dissolved in the

polymer to form a homogeneous mixture. This is usually done
through
pressurization.
Subsequent
pressure
release
or
temperature increase results in a supersaturation state, and gas
starts to form nuclei and expand.
The traditional CFC physical blowing agents have good solubility in
the polymer matrix, low diffusivity and low thermal conductivity
that result in foam products with good insulation and physical
properties. However, their use has been greatly reduced globally
because of their high ozone depletion effect.
Other choices of foam blowing agents include hydrofluorocarbon
(HFCs); hydrocarbons (propane, butane, pentane, etc.); inert gases
such as nitrogen, argon and CO2; and water.
HFCs do not destroy the ozone, but they have a negative impact
on global warming and their applications will most likely be
regulated in the near future.
Hydrocarbons present some serious problems, such as a greater

CO2 as the blowing agent

CO2 is the most favorable choice because it is inexpensive, nontoxic, and environmentally benign (zero Ozone Depletion
Potential, and 100 year Global Warming Potential compared to
1300 years for HFC)
Many challenges must be met to enable the use of CO2 as a
blowing agent.
The three primary issues are:
(1)The low solubility of CO2 in most polymer melts.
(2)CO2 has a high diffusivity in the polymer melt due to its small
size while this ensures a fast mixing process, it also results
in quick escape of gas from the foam after processing.
(3)CO2 has a higher gas thermal conductivity in comparison with
that of HFC blowing agents.
Nanocomposites offer several potential advantages in
the foaming processes:
() The surface of nanoparticles can be modified to increase
intermolecular interactions with CO2.
() The plate-like nanoparticles can improve the barrier property

Montreal vs. Kyoto: A Tale of Two Protocols

Cass R. Sunstein Harvard Law School
Abstract:

Over the last thirty years, climate change and depletion of the ozone layer have been widely
believed to be the world's largest environmental problems. The two problems have many
similarities. Both involve global risks created by diverse nations, and both seem to be best
handled through international agreements. In addition, both raise serious issues of
intergenerational and international equity. Future generations stand to lose a great deal,
whereas the costs of restrictions would be borne in the first instance by the current generation;
and while wealthy nations are largely responsible for the current situati
n, poorer nations are anticipated to be quite vulnerable in the future. But an extraordinarily
successful agreement, the Montreal Protocol, has served largely to eliminate the production and
use of ozone-depleting chemicals, while the Kyoto Protocol has spurred (encourage) only
modest (small) steps toward stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions. What accounts for the
dramatic difference between the two protocols? Part of the explanation lies in the radically
different self-interested judgments of the United States; part of the explanation lies in the very
different payoff structures of the two agreements. Influenced by the outcome of a purely
domestic cost-benefit analysis involving reductions in ozone-depleting chemicals, the United
States enthusiastically supported the Montreal Protocol. Influenced by the very different
outcome of cost-benefit analyses for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, the United States
aggressively opposed the Kyoto Protocol. An examination of the two protocols suggests that
neither agreement fit the simple structure of a prisoner's dilemma, in which a nation gain from
an enforceable agreement, gains even more if it is the only nation not to comply (obey) while all
others do, and lose most if it, and everyone else, pursue their own national self-interest. For the
United States, at least, compliance with the Montreal Protocol would have been justified even if
no other country had complied; for the United States, and for several other countries,
compliance with the Kyoto Protocol would not have been justified even if all other parties had
complied. An understanding of the judgments that surround the two protocols indicates that
even though moral considerations require the United States to spend a great deal to protect

Polyurethane

The
difference
between
making
polyurethane
and
polyurethane foam is that a gas has to be incorporated in the
final product. To achieve this the isocyanate group is reacted
with water forming an amine and CO2 gas.

Foaming Processes

Foaming Processes

Slabstock foaming:
In this continuous process the raw materials,
polyol, di-isocyanate, water, catalysts (accelerate and control the rate of
the water/di-isocyanate reaction) and other additives are mixed
continuously into an in-line mixer and the mixed reactants, still in liquid
form, are poured into a continuous paper and/or polyethylene mould on
moving conveyor. In the mould, the liquids foam and expand to form a
continuous block of foam. This block is out into sections, stored for at least
a day to cure and cool, and then cut in variety of ways into the shapes
required. The main uses for this foam are mattresses, furnitures,

Extrusion foaming
Continuous extrusion foaming is the most commonly used
technology in the foam industry. Both single- and twin-screw
extruders can be used for plastic foaming. In a typical extrusion
foaming process, the foaming gas is first injected into the barrel
and mixed with the polymer to form a homogenous solution.
When the homogenous polymer/gas mixture passes through a
die, a rapid pressure drop induces phase separation and cell
nucleation. Pressure drop, and especially the pressure drop rate,
is the primary driving force for cell nucleation. An extra shaping
die is used to control the product shape and foam expansion. The
foamed materials continue to expand until the extrudate
temperature is lower than Tg and the foam product is vitrified.

Foaming Processes

Foaming Processes

Foaming Processes

Foam injection molding

Foaming agent is introduced into the polymer melt stream, creating a
homogenous mixture of polymer and gas. The mixture is short-shot
injected through nozzles into the mold in a volume that is less than
the amount required to mold a solid part. Once the plastic gas mixture
enters the mold cavity, the gas expands (i.e. foams), filling the cavity
and forming cellular structures within the part.
A rigid skin is formed when the melt contacts the cold surface of the
mold. The expanding polymer/gas mixture forms the cellular core.
The finished part is typically 10 30% less weight than an equivalent
solid part.

Ford investigating use of microcellular foam injection molding

to reduce vehicle component weight 23 March 2011
Foam injection molded products have cellular cores surrounded
by rigid skins.

To produce microcellular foams, a new screw designed for better mixing and
a new sealed barrel with gas injectors were used. Highly controlled use of a
gas such as CO2 or nitrogen in its supercritical state (SCF) in the injection

Among the molding parameters studied, shot size has the most
significant effect on cell size, cell density, and tensile strength:
The minimum cell size was achieved at the medium shot
size. Conceivably, the larger the shot size, the slower the cooling
rate, and thus the longer the cooling time promotes more cell
growth. On the other hand, with the smaller shot size, the cells have
more space to grow, which is in favor of larger cell sizes.
When the same shot size is used or the same amount of material is
injection molded, the finer and denser microcells in samples
usually lead to higher impact strength and less reduction in
tensile strength, unless some defects such as coalescence and
open cells occur in the cell formation.

Polystyrene Foaming Processes

Foaming Processes

Aerogels
Aerogel is a synthetic porous ultralight material derived from a gel,
in which the liquid component of the gel has been replaced with a
gas. Transparent superinsulating silica aerogels exhibit the lowest
thermal conductivity of any solid known. Ultrahigh surface area
carbon aerogels power today's fast-charging supercapacitors.
Aerogels are produced by extracting the
liquid component of a gel through
supercritical drying. This allows the
liquid to be slowly dried off without
causing the solid matrix in the gel to
collapse from capillary action, as would
happen with conventional evaporation.

Valentine Aerogel

Aerogels are nearly transparent and possess

extremely low density, but theyre incredibly
strong. The above picture shows aerogel weighing

Supercritical drying

Supercritical drying from liquid to

gas does not cross any phase
boundary,
instead
passing
through the supercritical region,
where the distinction between
gas and liquid ceases to apply.
Densities of the liquid phase and
vapor phase become equal at
critical point of drying.

Supercritical drying (red arrow) goes

beyond the critical point of the working
fluid in order to avoid the direct liquidgas
transition seen in ordinary drying (green
arrow) or the two phase changes in
freeze-drying (blue arrow).