pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.03506 · v1 · pith:6GAQ7HLWnew · submitted 2019-07-08 · ⚛️ physics.app-ph · cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Mechanical properties of PMMA sepiolite nanocellular materials with a bimodal cellular structure

Victoria Bernardo , Frederik Van Loock , Judith Martin de Leon , Norman A. Fleck , Miguel Angel Rodriguez Perez This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 00:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.app-ph cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords PMMAsepiolitenanocellular foambimodal cellular structurefracture toughnesssolid state foamingnanocomposite
0
0 comments X

The pith

Sepiolite nanoparticles strongly enhance the relative fracture toughness of bimodal cellular PMMA through improved dispersion during foaming.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The authors produce bimodal cellular poly(methyl methacrylate) containing both micron-scale and 300-500 nm cells, with up to 5 weight percent sepiolite nanoparticles and porosities between 50 and 75 percent, using solid-state foaming. Uniaxial compression and single-edge-notch-bend tests then measure how sepiolite concentration changes the elastic modulus, yield strength, and fracture toughness of the resulting solid and foamed nanocomposites. The relative modulus stays roughly constant across the full porosity range, while a mild increase appears near 50 percent porosity; relative compressive strength declines mildly with added sepiolite. In contrast, relative fracture toughness rises substantially, which the paper attributes to foaming-driven improvement in particle dispersion plus the migration of micron-sized aggregates out of the solid phase and into the microcellular pores.

Core claim

A strong enhancement of the relative fracture toughness by the addition of sepiolites is observed. The enhancement of the relative fracture toughness and the relative modulus (at 50 percent porosity) can be attributed to an improved dispersion of the particles due to foaming and the migration of micron sized aggregates from the solid phase to the microcellular pores during foaming.

What carries the argument

Migration of micron-sized sepiolite aggregates into the microcellular pores during foaming, which improves particle dispersion in the remaining solid phase.

If this is right

  • Relative modulus shows a mild increase at 50 percent porosity when sepiolite is added.
  • Relative compressive strength decreases mildly with rising sepiolite concentration.
  • The toughness gain persists across the 50-75 percent porosity window examined.
  • The same dispersion mechanism is offered as the cause for both the toughness increase and the modulus gain at 50 percent porosity.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Foaming could serve as a general dispersion aid for nanoparticles in other polymer matrices if aggregate migration can be controlled.
  • The presence of a bimodal cell-size distribution may be necessary to accommodate aggregate migration without cell rupture.
  • Similar toughness benefits might appear in other nanocellular systems if the matrix permits comparable particle relocation during expansion.

Load-bearing premise

The measured mechanical trends arise primarily from particle dispersion and aggregate migration rather than from uncontrolled variations in cell-size distribution, matrix crystallinity, or test-specimen preparation artifacts.

What would settle it

Prepare otherwise identical bimodal foams in which particle dispersion state is varied independently of the foaming step, then compare their fracture toughness values.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.03506 by Frederik Van Loock, Judith Martin de Leon, Miguel Angel Rodriguez Perez, Norman A. Fleck, Victoria Bernardo.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: shows an example of the nominal stress versus nominal strain curves obtained for the uniaxial compression tests of the solid and cellular nanocomposites. The solid PMMA is compared with the nanocomposite 2%-S, together with their corresponding cellular materials at high relative density (close to 0.5). The solid and cellular materials initially deform in a linear, elastic manner up until the yield point af… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: shows the elastic modulus and the compressive yield strength of the solid nanocomposites as a function of sepiolite content. It is observed that both properties increase as the sepiolite content increases up to a content in the range of 2 wt% to 3 wt%. Increasing the sepiolite content to 5 wt% does not result in a further increase of the modulus and strength. These trends represent the typical behaviour of… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: c [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: a) Relative modulus of the cellular PMMA and the nanocomposites as a function of the relative density with contours predicted by equation (7) for 𝐾 = 1 and 𝑛 values ranging from 1 to 2; b) Predicted trends by fitting equation (7) to the relative modulus data with corresponding 𝑛 values; c) Relative compressive strength of the cellular PMMA and the nanocomposites as a function of the relative density with c… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: b [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: b (strength). The measured modulus of the solid nanocomposite divided by the modulus of the solid PMMA is plotted as a function of the sepiolite concentration in Figure 5a. The strength of the solid nanocomposite divided by the strength of the solid PMMA is plotted as a function of the sepiolite concentration in Figure 5b. From Figure 5a and Figure 5b we conclude that, although there is an enhancement of t… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Reconstructed tomography images of 2%-S: a) solid nanocomposite and b) cellular nanocomposite with a relative density close to 0.5. Another potential rationale behind the observed enhancement of the elastic modulus values of the high density materials is related to the position of the aggregates in the cellular materials. Based on SEM micrographs and tomography images, we observe that most of the micro-siz… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Example of aggregates inside the microcellular pores (red arrows): a) SEM micrograph of the cellular material 5%-S with relative density close to 0.5 and b) reconstructed tomography of the cellular material 2%-S with relative density around 0.5. 3.3.Fracture Toughness 3.3.1. Effect of relative density on fracture toughness [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: shows the measured1 𝐾𝐼𝐶 of the solid nanocomposites and the pure PMMA as a function of sepiolite concentration. The measured fracture toughness of the unfilled PMMA is close to 1.7 MPa m1/2, in agreement with reported values for 𝐾𝐼𝐶 of PMMA in the literature [58]. It is observed that the fracture toughness decreases as the sepiolite content increases. This result is in agreement with earlier works reportin… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Bimodal cellular poly(methyl methacrylate) with micron and nano sized (300 to 500 nm) cells with up to 5 weight percent of sepiolite nanoparticles and porosity from 50 weight percent to 75 weight percent are produced by solid state foaming. Uniaxial compression tests are performed to measure the effect of sepiolite concentration on the elastic modulus and the yield strength of the solid and cellular nanocomposites. Single edge notch bend tests are conducted to relate the fracture toughness of the solid and cellular nanocomposites to sepiolite concentration. The relative modulus is independent of sepiolite content to within material scatter when considering the complete porosity range. In contrast, a mild enhancement of the relative modulus is observed by the addition of sepiolite particles for the foamed nanocomposites with a porosity close to 50 percent. The relative compressive strength of the cellular nanocomposites mildly decreases as a function of sepiolite concentration. A strong enhancement of the relative fracture toughness by the addition of sepiolites is observed. The enhancement of the relative fracture toughness and the relative modulus (at 50 percent porosity) can be attributed to an improved dispersion of the particles due to foaming and the migration of micron sized aggregates from the solid phase to the microcellular pores during foaming.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports experimental results on bimodal cellular PMMA-sepiolite nanocomposites (50-75% porosity, up to 5 wt% sepiolite) produced by solid-state foaming. Uniaxial compression and single-edge-notch-bend tests show that relative modulus is independent of sepiolite content across the full porosity range but exhibits mild enhancement at ~50% porosity; relative compressive strength mildly decreases with sepiolite loading; and relative fracture toughness is strongly enhanced. These mechanical trends are attributed to foaming-induced improvement in particle dispersion and migration of micron-sized aggregates into microcellular pores.

Significance. If the reported trends and their attribution hold after additional controls, the work would demonstrate a practical route to toughness enhancement in nanocellular polymer foams without major modulus penalty, which is relevant for lightweight structural materials. The experimental approach (solid-state foaming, standard mechanical tests) is conventional, but the manuscript provides no machine-checked elements, parameter-free models, or falsifiable predictions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the attribution of both the strong relative fracture-toughness enhancement and the mild modulus gain at 50% porosity to 'improved dispersion' and 'migration of micron-sized aggregates' is load-bearing yet rests on the untested premise that cell-size distribution, cell-wall thickness, matrix crystallinity, and specimen geometry remain statistically indistinguishable across the 0-5 wt% sepiolite series. No quantitative microstructural or crystallinity data versus sepiolite content are referenced to support this premise.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the claims of 'strong enhancement' in relative fracture toughness and 'mild enhancement' in relative modulus are presented without error bars, replicate counts, or statistical measures, preventing assessment of whether the observed trends exceed material scatter.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the precise definition of 'relative' quantities (normalized to unfilled solid, to unfilled foam, or to a reference porosity) is not stated, which affects interpretation of the reported trends.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the exact sepiolite weight fractions tested and the methods used to determine porosity and bimodal cell-size statistics are omitted, limiting reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate planned revisions to improve clarity and support for the claims in the abstract.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the attribution of both the strong relative fracture-toughness enhancement and the mild modulus gain at 50% porosity to 'improved dispersion' and 'migration of micron-sized aggregates' is load-bearing yet rests on the untested premise that cell-size distribution, cell-wall thickness, matrix crystallinity, and specimen geometry remain statistically indistinguishable across the 0-5 wt% sepiolite series. No quantitative microstructural or crystallinity data versus sepiolite content are referenced to support this premise.

    Authors: The manuscript includes SEM micrographs and quantitative cell-size distributions showing that the bimodal cellular morphology is maintained across the sepiolite series with comparable average nano- and micro-cell sizes. We agree, however, that explicit quantitative comparisons of cell-wall thickness, crystallinity (e.g., DSC data), and statistical checks on specimen geometry would provide stronger support for the attribution. We will revise the manuscript to add or reference these metrics and adjust the abstract wording to reflect the available evidence more precisely. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claims of 'strong enhancement' in relative fracture toughness and 'mild enhancement' in relative modulus are presented without error bars, replicate counts, or statistical measures, preventing assessment of whether the observed trends exceed material scatter.

    Authors: The body of the manuscript and associated figures present results from multiple replicates (typically n=5–8) with error bars and explicit discussion of material scatter; the abstract uses qualitative descriptors based on those data. To address the concern, we will revise the abstract to include a brief reference to the statistical measures and variability reported in the main text. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely experimental measurements with interpretive attribution

full rationale

The paper reports direct experimental results from solid-state foaming, uniaxial compression, and single-edge-notch-bend tests on PMMA-sepiolite nanocomposites. No equations, fitted parameters, predictive models, or derivation chains appear in the abstract or described content. The attribution of toughness/modulus gains to dispersion and aggregate migration is an interpretive hypothesis, not a self-referential derivation that reduces to its own inputs by construction. No self-citations, ansatzes, or uniqueness theorems are invoked. This matches the default expectation of no significant circularity (score 0-2) for measurement-based work.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper is purely experimental and introduces no free parameters, new axioms beyond standard test assumptions, or invented physical entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions of uniaxial compression and single-edge-notch-bend fracture-toughness testing hold for the cellular nanocomposites.
    The abstract invokes these tests without stating deviations or calibration details.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5771 in / 1227 out tokens · 23274 ms · 2026-05-25T00:59:26.926698+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Notario, J

    B. Notario, J. Pinto, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, Nanoporous polymeric materials : A new class of materials with enhanced properties, Prog. Polym. Sci. 78–79 (2016) 93–139. doi:10.1016/j.pmatsci.2016.02.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.pmatsci.2016.02.002 2016

  2. [2]

    Notario, J

    B. Notario, J. Pinto, E. Solorzano, J.A. de Saja, M. Dumon, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, Experimental validation of the Knudsen effect in nanocellular polymeric foams, Polymer (Guildf). 56 (2015) 57–67. doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2014.10.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2014.10.006 2015

  3. [3]

    Martin de-Leon, V

    J. Martin de-Leon, V. Bernardo, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, Low Density Nanocellular Polymers Based on PMMA Produced by Gas Dissolution Foaming : Fabrication and Cellular Structure Characterization, Polymers (Basel). 8 (2016) 1–16. doi:10.3390/polym8070265

    work page doi:10.3390/polym8070265 2016

  4. [4]

    Perez-Tamarit, B

    S. Perez-Tamarit, B. Notario, E. Solorzano, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, Light transmission in nanocellular polymers: are semi-transparent cellular polymers possible?, Mater. Lett. 210 (2017) 39–41. doi:10.1016/j.matlet.2017.08.109

    work page doi:10.1016/j.matlet.2017.08.109 2017

  5. [5]

    L. Li, L. Schulte, L.D. Clausen, K.M. Hansen, G.E. Jonsson, S. Ndoni, Gyroid nanoporous membranes with tunable permeability, ACS Nano. 5 (2011) 7754–7766. doi:10.1021/nn200610r

    work page doi:10.1021/nn200610r 2011

  6. [6]

    Pinto, M

    J. Pinto, M. Dumon, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, R. Garcia, C. Dietz, Block Copolymers Self- Assembly Allows Obtaining Tunable Micro or Nanoporous Membranes or Depth Filters Based on PMMA; Fabrication Method and Nanostructures, J. Phys. Chem. C. 118 (2014) 4656–4663. doi:10.1021/jp409803u

    work page doi:10.1021/jp409803u 2014

  7. [7]

    G.Q. Lu, X.S. Zhao, Nanoporous Materials — An Overview, in: Nanoporous Mater. Sci. Eng., Imperial Collegue Press, London, 2004. doi:10.1142/9781860946561_0001

    work page doi:10.1142/9781860946561_0001 2004

  8. [8]

    Notario, J

    B. Notario, J. Pinto, M.A. Rodríguez-Perez, Towards a new generation of polymeric foams: PMMA nanocellular foams with enhanced physical properties, Polymer (Guildf). 63 (2015) 116–126. doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2015.03.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2015.03.003 2015

  9. [9]

    Ashby, Materials Selection in Mechanical Design, Third edit, Elsevier, 1992

    M.F. Ashby, Materials Selection in Mechanical Design, Third edit, Elsevier, 1992. doi:10.1016/B978-1-85617-663-7.00011-4

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-1-85617-663-7.00011-4 1992

  10. [10]

    Miller, V

    D. Miller, V. Kumar, Microcellular and nanocellular solid-state polyetherimide (PEI) foams using sub-critical carbon dioxide II . Tensile and impact properties, Polymer (Guildf). 52 (2011) 2910–2919. doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2011.04.049

    work page doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2011.04.049 2011

  11. [11]

    Guo, Solid-state Polymer Nanofoams, University of Washington, 2015

    H. Guo, Solid-state Polymer Nanofoams, University of Washington, 2015

    work page 2015

  12. [12]

    Fischer, Polymer nanocomposites : from fundamental research to specific applications, Mater

    H. Fischer, Polymer nanocomposites : from fundamental research to specific applications, Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2003) 763–772. doi:10.1016/j.msec.2003.09.148

    work page doi:10.1016/j.msec.2003.09.148 2003

  13. [13]

    Yang, G.L

    F. Yang, G.L. Nelson, PMMA / Silica Nanocomposite Studies : Synthesis and Properties, (2003)

    work page 2003

  14. [14]

    Blivi, F

    A.S. Blivi, F. Benhui, J. Bai, D. Kondo, Experimental evidence of size effect in nano- reinforced polymers : Case of silica reinforced PMMA, Polym. Test. 56 (2016) 337–343. doi:10.1016/j.polymertesting.2016.10.025

    work page doi:10.1016/j.polymertesting.2016.10.025 2016

  15. [15]

    Pavlidou, C.D

    S. Pavlidou, C.D. Papaspyrides, A review on polymer – layered silicate nanocomposites, Prog. Polym. Sci. 33 (2008) 1119–1198. doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2008.07.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2008.07.008 2008

  16. [16]

    Mittal, Polymer Nanocomposite Foams, CRC Press, 2014

    V. Mittal, Polymer Nanocomposite Foams, CRC Press, 2014

    work page 2014

  17. [17]

    C.C. Ibeh, M. Bubacz, Current Trends in Nanocomposite Foams, J. Cell. Plast. 44 (2008) 493–515. doi:10.1177/0021955X08097707

    work page doi:10.1177/0021955x08097707 2008

  18. [18]

    Janani, M.H.N

    H. Janani, M.H.N. Famili, Investigation of a Strategy for Well Controlled Inducement of Microcellular and Nanocellular Morphologies in Polymers, Polym. Eng. Sci. 50 (2010) 1558–1570. doi:10.1002/pen

    work page doi:10.1002/pen 2010

  19. [19]

    W. Zhai, J. Yu, L. Wu, W. Ma, J. He, Heterogeneous nucleation uniformizing cell size distribution in microcellular nanocomposites foams, Polymer (Guildf). 47 (2006) 7580–

    work page 2006

  20. [20]

    doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2006.08.034

    work page doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2006.08.034 2006

  21. [21]

    J. Yang, L. Huang, Y. Zhang, F. Chen, P. Fan, M. Zhong, S. Yeh, A new promising nucleating agent for polymer foaming: Applications of ordered mesoporous silica particles in polymethyl methacrylate supercritical carbon dioxide microcellular foaming, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52 (2013) 14169–14178. doi:10.1021/ie4018447

    work page doi:10.1021/ie4018447 2013

  22. [22]

    Siripurapu, J.M

    S. Siripurapu, J.M. Desimone, S.A. Khan, R.J. Spontak, N. Carolina, N. Carolina, Controlled Foaming of Polymer Films through Restricted Surface Diffusion and the Addition of Nanosilica Particles or CO2-philic Surfactants, Macromolecules. 38 (2005) 2271–2280

    work page 2005

  23. [23]

    Fujimoto, S.S

    Y. Fujimoto, S.S. Ray, M. Okamoto, A. Ogami, K. Yamada, K. Ueda, Well-Controlled Biodegradable Nanocomposite Foams : From Microcellular to Nanocellular, Macromol. Rapid Commun. 24 (2003) 457–461

    work page 2003

  24. [24]

    Lee, C.B

    Y.H. Lee, C.B. Park, K.H. Wang, HDPE-Clay Nanocomposite Foams Blown with Supercritical CO2, J. Cell. Plast. 41 (2005) 487–502. doi:10.1177/0021955X05056964

    work page doi:10.1177/0021955x05056964 2005

  25. [25]

    Urbanczyk, C

    L. Urbanczyk, C. Calberg, C. Detrembleur, C. Jérôme, M. Alexandre, Batch foaming of SAN / clay nanocomposites with scCO 2 : A very tunable way of controlling the cellular morphology, Polymer (Guildf). 51 (2010) 3520–3531. doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2010.05.037

    work page doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2010.05.037 2010

  26. [26]

    Costeux, L

    S. Costeux, L. Zhu, Low density thermoplastic nanofoams nucleated by nanoparticles, Polymer (Guildf). 54 (2013) 2785–2795. doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2013.03.052

    work page doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2013.03.052 2013

  27. [27]

    Bernardo, J

    V. Bernardo, J. Martin-de León, E. Laguna-Gutiérrez, M.Á. Rodríguez-Pérez, PMMA- sepiolite nanocomposites as new promising materials for the production of nanocellular polymers, Eur. Polym. J. 96 (2017) 10–26. doi:10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2017.09.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2017.09.002 2017

  28. [28]

    Alvarez, J

    A. Alvarez, J. Santaren, A. Esteban-Cubillo, P. Aparicio, Development in Palygorskite- Sepiolite Research, Elsevier, 2011

    work page 2011

  29. [29]

    Ruiz-Hitzky, Molecular access to intracrystalline tunnels of sepiolite, J

    E. Ruiz-Hitzky, Molecular access to intracrystalline tunnels of sepiolite, J. Mater. Chem. 11 (2001) 86–91. doi:10.1039/b003197f

    work page doi:10.1039/b003197f 2001

  30. [30]

    Santaren, A

    J. Santaren, A. Alvarez, A. Esteban-Cubillo, B. Notario, D. Velasco, M.A. Rodrıguez-Perez, Improving the Cellular Structure and Thermal Conductivity of PS Foams by Using Sepiolites, in: Foams2012, 2012: pp. 1–5

    work page 2012

  31. [31]

    García, J

    N. García, J. Guzman, E. Benito, A. Esteban-Cubillo, E. Aguilar, J. Santaren, P. Tiemblo, Surface Modification of Sepiolite in Aqueous Gels by Using Methoxysilanes and Its Impact on the Nanofiber Dispersion Ability, Langmuir. 27 (2011) 3952–3959

    work page 2011

  32. [32]

    Kumar, N.P

    V. Kumar, N.P. Suh, A process for making microcellular parts, Polym. Eng. Sci. 30 (1990) 1323–1329

    work page 1990

  33. [33]

    Nadella, V

    K. Nadella, V. Kumar, W. Li, Constrained solid-state foaming of microcellular panels, Cell. Polym. 24 (2005) 71–90

    work page 2005

  34. [34]

    Pinto, E

    J. Pinto, E. Solorzano, M.A. Rodriguez-perez, J.A. De Saja, Characterization of the cellular structure based on user-interactive image analysis procedures, J. Cell. Plast. 49 (2013) 555–575. doi:10.1177/0021955X13503847

    work page doi:10.1177/0021955x13503847 2013

  35. [35]

    Kumar, Process synthesis for manufacturing microcellular thermoplastic parts, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1988

    V. Kumar, Process synthesis for manufacturing microcellular thermoplastic parts, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1988

    work page 1988

  36. [36]

    Bernardo, J

    V. Bernardo, J. Martín-de Leon, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, Production and characterization of nanocellular polyphenylsulfone foams, Mater. Lett. 178 (2016) 155–158. doi:10.1016/j.matlet.2016.05.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.matlet.2016.05.002 2016

  37. [37]

    Mandarim-de-Lacerda, Stereological tools in biomedical research, Ann

    C.A. Mandarim-de-Lacerda, Stereological tools in biomedical research, Ann. Brazilian Acad. Sci. 75 (2003) 469–486

    work page 2003

  38. [38]

    Hilyard, A

    N.C. Hilyard, A. Cunningham, Low density cellular plastics--Physical basis of behaviour, Chapman and Hall, London, 1994

    work page 1994

  39. [39]

    Solórzano, J

    E. Solórzano, J. Pinto, S. Pardo, F. Garcia-Moreno, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, Application of a microfocus X-ray imaging apparatus to the study of cellular polymers, Polym. Test. 32 (2013) 321–329. doi:10.1016/j.polymertesting.2012.11.016

    work page doi:10.1016/j.polymertesting.2012.11.016 2013

  40. [40]

    Escudero, E

    J. Escudero, E. Solorzano, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, F. Garcia-Moreno, J.A. de Saja, Structural Characterization and Mechanical Behaviour of LDPE Structural Foams. A Comparison with Conventional Foams, Cell. Polym. 28 (2009) 289–302

    work page 2009

  41. [41]

    International, D5045 − 14

    A. International, D5045 − 14. Standard Test Methods for Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness and Strain Energy Release Rate of Plastic Materials, (n.d.). doi:10.1520/D5045-14.priate

    work page doi:10.1520/d5045-14.priate

  42. [42]

    Dutta, P

    J. Dutta, P. Ramachandran, K. Naskar, Scrutinizing the influence of peroxide crosslinking of dynamically vulcanized EVA/TPU blends with special reference to cable sheathing applications, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 133 (2016) 1–17. doi:10.1002/app.43706

    work page doi:10.1002/app.43706 2016

  43. [43]

    L. Chen, D. Rende, L.S. Schadler, R. Ozisik, Polymer nanocomposite foams, J. Mater. Chem. A. 1 (2013) 3837–3850. doi:10.1039/c2ta00086e

    work page doi:10.1039/c2ta00086e 2013

  44. [44]

    X. Li, Q. Wang, H. Li, H. Ji, X. Sun, J. He, Effect of sepiolite fiber on the structure and properties of the sepiolite/silica aerogel composite, J. Sol-Gel Sci. Technol. 67 (2013) 646–653. doi:10.1007/s10971-013-3124-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s10971-013-3124-4 2013

  45. [45]

    Garcia-Lopez, J.F

    D. Garcia-Lopez, J.F. Fernandez, J.C. Merino, J. Santaren, J.M. Pastor, Effect of organic modification of sepiolite for PA 6 polymer/organoclay nanocomposites, Compos. Sci. Technol. 70 (2010) 1429–1436. doi:10.1016/j.compscitech.2010.05.020

    work page doi:10.1016/j.compscitech.2010.05.020 2010

  46. [46]

    J. Ma, J.A. Darr, Preparation of polypropylene / sepiolite nanocomposites using supercritical CO2 assisted mixing, Eur. Polym. J. 43 (2007) 4931–4939. doi:10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2007.09.010

    work page doi:10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2007.09.010 2007

  47. [47]

    Gibson, M

    L.J. Gibson, M. Ashby, Cellular solids: structure and properties, 2nd Editio, Cambridge University Press, 1997

    work page 1997

  48. [48]

    Mills, H.X

    N.J. Mills, H.X. Zhu, The high strain compression of closed cell polymer foams, J. Mech. Phys. Solids. 47 (1999) 669–695

    work page 1999

  49. [49]

    Lopez-Gil, C

    A. Lopez-Gil, C. Saiz-Arroyo, J. Tirado, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, Production of non- crosslinked thermoplastic foams with a controlled density and a wide range of cellular structures, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 132 (2015) 1–10. doi:10.1002/app.42324

    work page doi:10.1002/app.42324 2015

  50. [50]

    Frydrych, C

    M. Frydrych, C. Wan, R. Stengler, U.O. Kelly, B. Chen, Structure and mechanical properties of gelatin/sepiolite nanocomposite foams, J. Mater. Chem. 30 (2011) 9103–

    work page 2011

  51. [51]

    doi:10.1039/c1jm10788g

    work page doi:10.1039/c1jm10788g

  52. [52]

    Kumar, M

    V. Kumar, M. Vanderwel, J. Weller, K.A. Seeler, Experimental Characterization of the Tensile Behavior of Microcellular Polycarbonate Foams, J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 116 (1994) 439–445

    work page 1994

  53. [53]

    J. Fu, C. Jo, H.E. Naguib, Effect of Processing Parameters on Cellular Structures and Mechanical Properties of PMMA Microcellular Foams, Cell. Polym. 24 (2005) 177–195

    work page 2005

  54. [54]

    Saiz-Arroyo, M.A

    C. Saiz-Arroyo, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, J. Tirado, A. López-Gil, J.A. de Saja, Structure- property relationships of medium-density polypropylene foams, Polym. Int. 62 (2013) 1324–1333. doi:10.1002/pi.4424

    work page doi:10.1002/pi.4424 2013

  55. [55]

    Laguna-Gutierrez, C

    E. Laguna-Gutierrez, C. Saiz-Arroyo, J.I. Velasco, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, Low density polyethylene/silica nanocomposite foams. Relationship between chemical composition, particle dispersion, cellular structure and physical properties, Eur. Polym. J. 81 (2016) 173–185. doi:10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2016.06.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2016.06.001 2016

  56. [56]

    Velasco, M

    J.I. Velasco, M. Antunes, O. Ayyad, C. Saiz-Arroyo, M.A. Rodrıguez-Perez, F. Hidalgo, J.A. de Saja, Foams Based on Low Density Polyethylene / Hectorite Nanocomposites : Thermal Stability and Thermomechanical Properties, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 105 (2007) 1658–1667. doi:10.1002/app

    work page doi:10.1002/app 2007

  57. [57]

    Velasco, M

    J.I. Velasco, M. Antunes, O. Ayyad, J.M. Lopez-Cuesta, P. Gaudon, C. Saiz-Arroyo, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, J.A. de Saja, Foaming behaviour and cellular structure of LDPE / hectorite nanocomposites, Polymer (Guildf). 48 (2007) 2098–2108. doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2007.02.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2007.02.008 2007

  58. [58]

    Laguna-Gutierrez, R

    E. Laguna-Gutierrez, R. Van Hooghten, P. Moldenaers, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, Effects of extrusion process, type and content of clays, and foaming process on the clay exfoliation in HMS PP composites, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 132 (2015) 42430(1)-42430(14). doi:10.1002/app.42828

    work page doi:10.1002/app.42828 2015

  59. [59]

    Escudero, B

    J. Escudero, B. Notario, C. Jimenez, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, Characterization of nanoclay intercalation during foaming with in situ energy-dispersive X-ray diffraction, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. (2016) 43432(1)-43432(9). doi:10.1002/app.43432

    work page doi:10.1002/app.43432 2016

  60. [60]

    Varela-Rizo, M

    H. Varela-Rizo, M. Weisenberger, D.R. Bortz, I. Martin-Gullon, Fracture toughness and creep performance of PMMA composites containing micro and nanosized carbon filaments, Compos. Sci. Technol. 70 (2010) 1189–1195. doi:10.1016/j.compscitech.2010.03.005

    work page doi:10.1016/j.compscitech.2010.03.005 2010

  61. [61]

    Cotterell, J.Y.H

    B. Cotterell, J.Y.H. Chia, K. Hbaieb, Fracture mechanisms and fracture toughness in semicrystalline polymer nanocomposites, Eng. Fract. Mech. 74 (2007) 1054–1078. doi:10.1016/j.engfracmech.2006.12.023

    work page doi:10.1016/j.engfracmech.2006.12.023 2007

  62. [62]

    C.M. Chan, J. Wu, J.X. Li, Y.K. Cheung, Polypropylene/calcium carbonate nanocomposites, Polymer (Guildf). 43 (2002) 2981–2992. doi:10.1016/S0032- 3861(02)00120-9

    work page doi:10.1016/s0032- 2002

  63. [63]

    Naous, X.-Y

    W. Naous, X.-Y. Yu, Q.-X. Zhang, K. Naito, Y. Kagawa, Morphology, Tensile Properties, and Fracture Toughness of Epoxy/Al2O3 Nanocomposites WALID, J. Polym. Sci. Part B Polym. Phys. 44 (2006) 1466–1473. doi:10.1002/polb

    work page doi:10.1002/polb 2006