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
not sourced
not sourced
Bulk modulus
not sourced
not sourced
Speed of sound
5,457m/s
not sourced
Thermal
Thermal conductivity
125W/m·Ksourcemeasured on specimens cut from a 50 x 100 x 5 mm flat die casting (Daiki)
0.151W/m·Ksourcegovernment selected value (US Army Natick Laboratories TR 66-49-PR, 1966), soft vulcanized natural rubber, 25 °C
Thermal expansion
21µm/m·Ksourcemeasured, temperature range not stated (Daiki)
JIS ADC12 (Al-Si-Cu, about A383 / EN AC-46100) high-pressure die-casting alloy, as cast; physical properties from Daiki Aluminium Industry (ADC12 ingot producer) measured values; modulus from S.S.Aluminum (ADC12 ingot producer) standard values.
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 ADC12 stronger than Rubber?
Aluminum ADC12 is stronger: its yield strength is 149 MPa against tensile strength 23 MPa for Rubber (6.48x).
Which is lighter, Aluminum ADC12 or Rubber?
Rubber is lighter: 960 kg/m³ against 2,680 kg/m³ for Aluminum ADC12.
Which is lighter for the same job, Aluminum ADC12 or Rubber?
For the same stiffness or strength: Aluminum ADC12 is lighter for a strong rod or tie, strong beam; Rubber is lighter for a strong panel or plate.
Part that must be
Aluminum ADC12
Rubber
Strong rod or tie
lighter
2.32x heavier
Strong beam
lighter
24% heavier
Strong panel or plate
10% heavier
lighter
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 conducts heat better, Aluminum ADC12 or Rubber?
Aluminum ADC12 conducts heat better: 125 W/m·K against 0.151 W/m·K for Rubber.