FabDigitFabDigit

EMA vs EVOH

Polymer · grade comparison

EMA and EVOH are both polymer grades. EVOH is the stronger of the two: tensile strength 68 MPa (9.86 ksi) against 9 MPa (1.23 ksi) for EMA, about 8.0 times as much. In exchange, EMA is the more ductile: elongation 750% versus 230% for EVOH, and EVOH is harder (78 Shore D vs 30 Shore D). EMA is lighter (0.94 g/cm³ vs 1.19 g/cm³ for EVOH) and EVOH is stiffer (2.9 GPa vs 0.02 GPa). On the shop floor, EVOH machines more easily (good vs poor), EMA welds better (excellent vs good), and EMA sits in a lower cost tier (standard, $$) than EVOH (premium, $$$).

EMAChoose it when the part is bent, formed or impact-loaded, or when weight is the constraint.

EVOHChoose it when strength drives the design, or when the part sees heat.

EMA vs EVOH: properties

EMAEVOH

Mechanical

Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.

Elastic (Young's) Modulus

0.02 GPa0 Msi
2.9 GPa0.42 Msi

Poisson's Ratio

0.46
0.4

Tensile Strength (Ultimate)

9 MPa1.2 ksi
68 MPa9.9 ksi

Elongation at Break

750%
230%

Flexural Modulus

0.02 GPa0 Msi
3 GPa0.44 Msi

Izod Impact, Notched

1,000 J/m18.7 ft·lbf/in
45 J/m0.84 ft·lbf/in

Hardness, Shore A

88 Shore A
—

Hardness, Shore D

30 Shore D
78 Shore D

Tear Strength

55 kN/m314 lbf/in
—

Yield Strength (0.2% offset)

—
58 MPa8.4 ksi

Compressive Strength

—
80 MPa11.6 ksi

Flexural Strength

—
100 MPa14.5 ksi

Shear Strength

—
45 MPa6.5 ksi

Fracture Toughness (K_IC)

—
3 MPa·√m2.7 ksi·√in

Hardness, Rockwell M

—
85 HRM

Hardness, Rockwell R

—
118 HRR

Physical

Density and transition temperatures.

Density

0.94 g/cm³0.03 lb/in³
1.19 g/cm³0.04 lb/in³

Melting Temperature (Tm)

88°C190 °F
183°C361 °F

Glass Transition (Tg)

-35°C-31 °F
69°C156 °F

Water Absorption (24 h)

0.07%
5.5%

Water Absorption (Saturation)

0.3%
9%

Refractive Index

1.49
1.53

Light Transmission

88%
91%

Thermal

How each material carries heat and how hot it can run.

Thermal Conductivity

0.25 W/m·K0.14 BTU/hr·ft·°F
0.33 W/m·K0.19 BTU/hr·ft·°F

Specific Heat Capacity

2,200 J/kg·K0.53 BTU/lb·°F
2,000 J/kg·K0.48 BTU/lb·°F

Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)

200 µm/m·K111 µin/in·°F
85 µm/m·K47.2 µin/in·°F

Max Service Temperature (continuous)

60°C140 °F
90°C194 °F

Min Service Temperature

-65°C-85 °F
-40°C-40 °F

Heat Deflection Temp. @ 0.45 MPa

42°C108 °F
160°C320 °F

Vicat Softening Point (B50)

45°C113 °F
168°C334 °F

Limiting Oxygen Index

19%
22%

Max Service Temperature (short-term)

85°C185 °F
130°C266 °F

Heat Deflection Temp. @ 1.8 MPa

—
68°C154 °F

Electrical

Conductivity and insulation.

Electrical Resistivity

1×10¹³ Ω·m3.94×10²⁰ µΩ·in
1×10¹¹ Ω·m3.94×10¹⁸ µΩ·in

Dielectric Strength

28 kV/mm711 V/mil
—

Dielectric Constant (1 MHz)

2.9
4

Dissipation Factor (1 MHz)

0.015
—

Volume Resistivity

1×10¹⁵ Ω·cm
1×10¹³ Ω·cm

Chemical & Environmental

Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).

Corrosion Resistance

85 / 100
70 / 100

UV / Weathering Resistance

35 / 100
40 / 100

Manufacturability

FabDigit workshop ratings (0–100 scores) — how each material behaves on the machine.

Machinability

20 / 100
55 / 100

Weldability

92 / 100
55 / 100

Formability (cold)

90 / 100
70 / 100

Polishability

30 / 100
60 / 100

Mold Shrinkage

2%
1%

Melt Flow Rate

6 g/10 min
1.6 g/10 min

Processing Melt Temperature (typ.)

180°C356 °F
215°C419 °F

Mold Temperature (typ.)

25°C77 °F
60°C140 °F

Sustainability

Primary-production footprint per kilogram.

Embodied Energy (primary production)

82 MJ/kg35,254 BTU/lb
90 MJ/kg38,693 BTU/lb

Embodied Carbon (primary production)

2.6 kg CO₂/kg
4.2 kg CO₂/kg

Embodied Water

110 L/kg13.2 gal/lb
250 L/kg30 gal/lb

Same in both: Typical Recycled Content 0%

Common Calculations

Ratios derived from the values above.

Specific Strength (UTS / density)

9 kN·m/kg
57 kN·m/kg

Specific Stiffness (E / density)

0 MN·m/kg
2.4 MN·m/kg

Same in both: Thermal Diffusivity 0.1 mm²/s · Thermal Shock Resistance Index 0

Strength versus weight

Yield strength against density for every polymer grade in the FabDigit library; the compared grades are highlighted. Up and left is stronger for its weight.

0.1110100123Density (g/cm³)Yield strength (MPa) — log scaleEVOH

Manufacturing and finishing

CapabilityEMAEVOH
Default condition——
Relative cost$$ Standard$$$ Premium
Min. machined wall——
Best machined surface——

EMA vs EVOH — frequently asked

Is EVOH stronger than EMA?

Yes. EVOH has a typical tensile strength of 68 MPa (9.86 ksi) against 9 MPa (1.23 ksi) for EMA — about 8.0 times as much.

Which is cheaper, EMA or EVOH?

EMA is the lower-cost material: it sits in the standard tier ($$) while EVOH is premium ($$$). Part price depends far more on geometry, tolerance and quantity than on raw stock — upload a CAD file for a live quote.

Which is easier to machine, EMA or EVOH?

EVOH. Its machinability rates good (55/100) against poor (20/100) for EMA; for welding the order is EMA first (excellent, 92/100) then EVOH (good, 55/100).

Ready to make it?

Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in EMA and EVOH side by side — material, machining time, tolerance and finish in one quote. Certified material data ships with the order on request.

Typical handbook values for the conditions named above, normalised for comparison. Hardness on non-Brinell scales is converted approximately for charting only. Request certified data with your order for design-critical properties.