Effect of ingredient ratios of rigid polyurethane foam on foam core panels properties

Abstract

One‐step manufacturing process (in‐situ foaming) provide great potential for the production of foam core panels. Polyurethane (PU) foam showed good applicability for use for in‐situ foaming. Here, the effect of ingredient ratios of rigid PU foam on foam performance and panel properties is investigated. It was observed that the isocyanate (ISO) content and polyols (PO) type and content significantly change the foam and panel properties. Foam cell density, as the most important factor influencing the foam characteristics, was higher in foams with higher ISO and polyether content. Bending strength, internal bond and screw withdrawal resistance of the foam core panels were significantly enhanced when the ISO and polyether content was increased in the foam formulation. Varying the ISO content had no influence on panel properties with higher content of polyester (60%) in the PO blend. Varying the foam ingredient ratios did not change the thickness swelling, while the water absorption was dependent on the foam components ratios. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2017, 134, 44722.

Effect of surface layers compressibility and face-to-core-layer ratio on the properties of lightweight hybrid panels

“…Reducing forest damage, improving the competitiveness of WBP manufacturers, and securing long-term wood supply can be achieved through improving resource efficiency (Mantau et al 2010). WBPs with reduced densities represent a way to optimise material resource usage and carbon footprint (Choupani Chaydarreh et al 2016).…”

“…WBPs with reduced densities represent a way to optimise material resource usage and carbon footprint (Choupani Chaydarreh et al. 2016).…”

A study on modified fabric‐contained melamine/bentonite polyurethane foam: Pb2+ adsorption and mechanical properties

“…The phenomenon is ascribed to the fact that the rigid fabric‐foam interface formed by smaller pore sizes, and the result of this study is consistent with the finding in the study by Chaydarreh. [ 34 ] The rigid interface then improves the compressive strength of porous fabric‐foam composites because a small pore size and large cell edges enable the products to resist greater compressive deformation. In addition, PU‐P‐PU has a larger area in its fabric‐foam interface than P‐PU as Figure 4C, and hence PU‐P‐PU exhibits greater compressive resistance.…”