Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 52, Issue 11, pp 6726–6740 | Cite as

Minimal contact formation between hollow glass microparticles toward low-density and thermally insulating composite materials

  • Zhen Wang
  • Tao Zhang
  • Byung Kyu Park
  • Woo Il Lee
  • David J. Hwang
Original Paper


In this study, syntactic foams composed of maximal hollow glass microparticles (HGMPs) volume fraction with improved thermal insulation performance and reasonable mechanical strength were fabricated through a new manufacturing approach. Use of low fraction binder materials diluted in solvent enabled minimal contacts among the HGMPs assisted by a natural capillary trend, as confirmed by in situ and ex situ optical and electron microscope imaging. Composite level samples of practical thickness, fabricated by a layer-by-layer coating approach, exhibited enhanced thermal insulation performance, as characterized by infrared thermal imaging and quantitative thermal conductivity measurement. Via microscope inspection under tensile loading, a favorable particles–binder bonding trend was inspected in terms of mechanical strength. The fabricated composite materials have potential for building insulation applications because of their relatively simple and scalable manufacturing nature, minimal use of binder materials, and mechanical strength to maintain and tailor shape. Further studies are necessary to understand mechanical and thermal properties of the composites, and key fabrication mechanisms involved with self-assembly under complex multi-components and phases.


Composite Coating Binder Material Syntactic Foam Heat Flux Sensor Spin Speed 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This research was supported by a Grant (code# 14CTAP-C086566-01-000000) from Technology Advancement Research Program funded by Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of Korean government. The electron microscope analysis was performed at the Center for Functional Nanomaterials, Brookhaven National Laboratory, which is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, under Contract No. DE-AC02-98CH10886.


  1. 1.
    Saha MC, Nilufar S, Major M, Jeelani S (2008) Processing and performance evaluation of hollow microspheres filled epoxy composites. Polym Compos 29(3):293–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Immarigeon JP, Holt RT, Koul AK, Zhao L, Wallace W, Beddoes JC (1995) Lightweight materials for aircraft applications. Mater Charact 35(1):41–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Budov VV (1994) Review: hollow glass microspheres. Use, properties, and technology. Glass Ceram 51(7):7–8Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yun TS, Jeong YJ, Han TS, Youm KS (2013) Evaluation of thermal conductivity for thermally insulated concretes. Energy Build 61:125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shunmugasamy VC, Pinisetty D, Gupta N (2014) Electrical properties of hollow glass particle filled vinyl ester matrix syntactic foams. J Mater Sci 49:180–190. doi: 10.1007/s10853-013-7691-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bardella L, Genna F (2001) Elastic design of syntactic foamed sandwiches obtained by filling of three-dimensional sandwich-fabric panels. Solids Struct 38(2):7235–7260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gupta N, Ye R, Porfiri M (2010) Comparison of tensile and compressive characteristics of vinyl ester/glass microballoon syntactic foams. Compos B 41(3):236–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gupta N, Pinisetty D (2013) A review of thermal conductivity of polymer matrix syntactic foams—effect of hollow particle wall thickness and volume fraction. JOM 65(2):234–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gupta N, Nagorny R (2006) Tensile properties of glass microballoon-epoxy resin syntactic foams. J Appl Polym Sci 102:1254–1261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bardy E, Mollendorf J, Pendergast D (2006) Thermal resistance and compressive strain of underwater aerogel–syntactic foam hybrid insulation at atmospheric and elevated hydrostatic pressure. J Phys D Appl Phys 39:1908–1918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bardy E, Mollendorf J, Pendergast D (2005) Thermal conductivity and compressive strain of foam neoprene insulation under hydrostatic pressure. J Phys D App Phys 48(20):3832–3840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shabde VS, Hoo KA, Gladysz GM (2006) Experimental determination of the thermal conductivity of three-phase syntactic foams. J Mater Sci 41:4061–4073.  10.1007/s10853-006-7637-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gupta N, Zeltmann SE, Shunmugasamy VC, Pinisetty D (2014) Applications of polymer matrix syntactic foams. JOM 66(2):245–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yu A, Ramesh P, Itkis ME, Bekyarova E, Haddon RC (2007) Graphite nanoplatelet-epoxy composite thermal interface materials. J Phys Chem C 111(21):7565–7569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Boudenne A, Ibos L, Gehin E, Candau Y (2003) A simultaneous characterization of thermal conductivity and diffusivity of polymer materials by a periodic method. J Phys D Appl Phys 37(1):132–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jiang P, Mcfarland MJ (2004) Large-scale fabrication of wafer-size colloidal crystals, macroporous polymers and nanocomposites by spin-coating. JACS 126(42):13778–13786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sun Y, Zhao L, Pan H, Lu X, Gu L, Hu YS, Li H, Armand M, Ikuhara Y, Chen L, Huang X (2013) Direct atomic-scale confirmation of three-phase storage mechanism in Li4Ti5O12 anodes for room-temperature sodium-ion batteries. Nat Commun 4(1870):1–10Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li M, Zhang H, Ju Y (2012) Design and construction of a guarded hot plate apparatus operating down to liquid nitrogen temperature. Rev Sci Instrum 83:075106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Incropera FP, DeWitt DP (2002) Fundamentals of heat and mass transfer, 5th edn. Wiley, London, pp 90–93, 593Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bardella L, Genna F (2001) On the elastic behavior of syntactic foams. Int J Solids Struct 38:7235–7260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gupta N, Ricci W (2006) Comparison of compressive properties of layered syntactic foams having gradient in microballoon volume fraction and wall thickness. Mater Sci Eng A 427:331–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringState University of New YorkStony BrookUSA
  2. 2.Instittute of Advanced Machinery and DesignSeoul National UniversitySeoulKorea
  3. 3.School of Mechanical and Aerospace EngineeringSeoul National UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations