Materials / Compare
Aluminum 5052-H32 vs. Rubber
Compare Aluminum 5052-H32 vs. Rubber strength, stiffness, weight and thermal properties.
| Try it on a partA bracket to run stress or thermal on, free in your browser | Open in LessCAD | Open in LessCAD |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanical | ||
| Yield strength | 195MPasourcetypical, 0.2% offset | not given (tensile used) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 230MPasourcetypical10x stronger | 23MPasourcetypical |
| Elongation at break | 12%sourcetypical | 830%sourcetypical69.2x more ductile |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 70GPasourcetypical | not sourced |
| Density | 2,685kg/m³sourcenominal | 960kg/m³sourcetypical (specific gravity) |
| Strength to weight | 72.6kN·m/kg3.03x higher | 24kN·m/kg |
| Stiffness to weight | 26.1MN·m/kg | not sourced |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.33sourcetypical (handbook physical constant) | 0.5sourcegovernment (NBS J. Res. 68A, 1964): computed by NBS for peroxide-cured gum NR vulcanizate, 25 °C, infinitesimal deformation0.49 in the solver: the linear element locks as the ratio nears 0.5 (nearly incompressible). |
| Shear modulus | 26.3GPa | not sourced |
| Bulk modulus | 68.6GPa | not sourced |
| Speed of sound | 5,106m/s | not sourced |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 138W/m·Ksourcebase material: 5052 in O temper (same alloy, annealed); Kaiser typical | 0.151W/m·Ksourcegovernment selected value (US Army Natick Laboratories TR 66-49-PR, 1966), soft vulcanized natural rubber, 25 °C |
| Thermal expansion | 23.8µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | not sourced |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 119µm growth | not sourced |
| Specific heat | 963J/kg·Ksourceat 100 °C (212 °F); table covers O, H32, H34, H36, H38 | 1,881J/kg·Ksourcegovernment (NBS J. Res. 68A, Table 7; values observed for unvulcanized NR by Bekkedahl and Matheson), 25 °C |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 53.4mm²/s638x faster | 0.0836mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 10,822W/m | not sourced |
| Melting point | 605–650°Csourcemelting range | not sourced |
| Max service temperature | not sourced | 70°Csourcecontinuous use operating range |
| Values for | 5052-H32, Kaiser Aluminum tube & pipe typical datasheet (mechanical, CTE, melting); MIL-HDBK-5J (Poisson, density, specific heat) | Weir Minerals Linatex Premium rubber (95 % natural rubber), typical physical properties, spec sheet WMD0118/202305 |
Every value links to the document that states it. "Not sourced" means no citable source states it (or only a specification minimum); figures computed from it are left out too.
Questions
Is Aluminum 5052-H32 stronger than Rubber?
Aluminum 5052-H32 is stronger: its yield strength is 195 MPa against tensile strength 23 MPa for Rubber (8.48x).
Which is lighter, Aluminum 5052-H32 or Rubber?
Rubber is lighter: 960 kg/m³ against 2,685 kg/m³ for Aluminum 5052-H32.
Which is lighter for the same job, Aluminum 5052-H32 or Rubber?
For the same stiffness or strength: Aluminum 5052-H32 is lighter for a strong rod or tie, strong beam, strong panel or plate.
| Part that must be | Aluminum 5052-H32 | Rubber |
|---|---|---|
| Strong rod or tie | lighter | 3.03x heavier |
| Strong beam | lighter | 49% heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 4% heavier |
For the same stiffness or strength, mass scales with density over stiffness (or strength) raised to a power set by how the part is loaded: 1 for a rod in tension, 1/2 for a beam in bending, 1/3 for a panel (the standard material-selection indices).
Which is more ductile, Aluminum 5052-H32 or Rubber?
Rubber stretches further before it breaks: 830% elongation at break against 12% for Aluminum 5052-H32.
Which conducts heat better, Aluminum 5052-H32 or Rubber?
Aluminum 5052-H32 conducts heat better: 138 W/m·K against 0.151 W/m·K for Rubber.