FabDigitFabDigit

EPS 150 vs RIM PU Foam

Polymer · grade comparison

EPS 150 and RIM PU Foam are both polymer grades. RIM PU Foam is the stronger of the two: yield strength 8 MPa (1.16 ksi) against 0.15 MPa (0.0218 ksi) for EPS 150, about 53 times as much; tensile strength follows at 12 MPa (1.74 ksi) vs 0.3 MPa (0.0435 ksi). RIM PU Foam is the more ductile: elongation 130% versus 2% for EPS 150. EPS 150 is lighter (0.03 g/cm³ vs 0.6 g/cm³ for RIM PU Foam) and RIM PU Foam is stiffer (0.22 GPa vs 0.01 GPa). On the shop floor, EPS 150 machines more easily (excellent vs good) and EPS 150 welds better (fair vs not recommended).

EPS 150Choose it when weight is the constraint, or when the part is machined in volume.

RIM PU FoamChoose it when strength drives the design, or when the part is bent, formed or impact-loaded.

EPS 150 vs RIM PU Foam: properties

EPS 150RIM PU Foam

Mechanical

Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.

Elastic (Young's) Modulus

0.01 GPa0 Msi
0.22 GPa0.03 Msi

Shear Modulus

0 GPa5.8×10⁻⁴ Msi
—

Poisson's Ratio

0.1
0.35

Tensile Strength (Ultimate)

0.3 MPa0.04 ksi
12 MPa1.7 ksi

Yield Strength (0.2% offset)

0.15 MPa0.02 ksi
8 MPa1.2 ksi

Elongation at Break

2%
130%

Compressive Strength

0.16 MPa0.02 ksi
9 MPa1.3 ksi

Compressive Modulus

0.01 GPa0 Msi
0.2 GPa0.03 Msi

Flexural Strength

0.28 MPa0.04 ksi
14 MPa2 ksi

Flexural Modulus

0.01 GPa0 Msi
0.25 GPa0.04 Msi

Shear Strength

0.14 MPa0.02 ksi
7 MPa1 ksi

Compression Set (22 h, 70 °C)

8%
18%

Izod Impact, Notched

—
250 J/m4.7 ft·lbf/in

Hardness, Shore A

—
92 Shore A

Hardness, Shore D

—
45 Shore D

Tear Strength

—
32 kN/m183 lbf/in

Physical

Density and transition temperatures.

Density

0.03 g/cm³0 lb/in³
0.6 g/cm³0.02 lb/in³

Glass Transition (Tg)

100°C212 °F
80°C176 °F

Water Absorption (24 h)

1%
0.6%

Water Absorption (Saturation)

3.5%
2.5%

Thermal

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

Thermal Conductivity

0.03 W/m·K0.02 BTU/hr·ft·°F
0.08 W/m·K0.05 BTU/hr·ft·°F

Specific Heat Capacity

1,400 J/kg·K0.33 BTU/lb·°F
1,700 J/kg·K0.41 BTU/lb·°F

Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)

65 µm/m·K36.1 µin/in·°F
120 µm/m·K66.7 µin/in·°F

Max Service Temperature (continuous)

80°C176 °F
95°C203 °F

Min Service Temperature

-50°C-58 °F
-40°C-40 °F

Vicat Softening Point (B50)

96°C205 °F
—

Limiting Oxygen Index

25%
20%

Max Service Temperature (short-term)

100°C212 °F
130°C266 °F

Heat Deflection Temp. @ 0.45 MPa

—
80°C176 °F

Heat Deflection Temp. @ 1.8 MPa

—
55°C131 °F

Electrical

Conductivity and insulation.

Electrical Resistivity

1×10¹³ Ω·m3.94×10²⁰ µΩ·in
1×10¹⁰ Ω·m3.94×10¹⁷ µΩ·in

Dielectric Constant (1 MHz)

1.03
2.8

Dissipation Factor (1 MHz)

3×10⁻⁴
0.04

Volume Resistivity

1×10¹⁵ Ω·cm
1×10¹² Ω·cm

Dielectric Strength

—
12 kV/mm305 V/mil

Surface Resistivity

—
1×10¹³ Ω

Comparative Tracking Index (CTI)

—
600 V

Chemical & Environmental

Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).

Corrosion Resistance

58 / 100
72 / 100

UV / Weathering Resistance

12 / 100
35 / 100

Manufacturability

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

Machinability

88 / 100
55 / 100

Weldability

40 / 100
10 / 100

Mold Shrinkage

0.4%
1.2%

Processing Melt Temperature (typ.)

115°C239 °F
40°C104 °F

Polishability

—
35 / 100

Mold Temperature (typ.)

—
62°C144 °F

Same in both: Formability (cold) 25 / 100

Sustainability

Primary-production footprint per kilogram.

Embodied Energy (primary production)

95 MJ/kg40,843 BTU/lb
105 MJ/kg45,142 BTU/lb

Embodied Carbon (primary production)

3.3 kg CO₂/kg
4.6 kg CO₂/kg

Embodied Water

190 L/kg22.8 gal/lb
250 L/kg30 gal/lb

Typical Recycled Content

5%
3%

Common Calculations

Ratios derived from the values above.

Specific Strength (UTS / density)

11 kN·m/kg
20 kN·m/kg

Specific Stiffness (E / density)

0.3 MN·m/kg
0.4 MN·m/kg

Modulus of Resilience

1 kJ/m³
145 kJ/m³

Thermal Diffusivity

0.8 mm²/s
0.1 mm²/s

Same in both: 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 scaleEPS 150RIM PU Foam

Manufacturing and finishing

CapabilityEPS 150RIM PU Foam
Default condition——
Relative cost$$ Standard$$ Standard
Min. machined wall——
Best machined surface——

EPS 150 vs RIM PU Foam — frequently asked

Is RIM PU Foam stronger than EPS 150?

Yes. RIM PU Foam has a typical yield strength of 8 MPa (1.16 ksi) against 0.15 MPa (0.0218 ksi) for EPS 150 — about 53 times as much. Tensile strength is 12 MPa (1.74 ksi) vs 0.3 MPa (0.0435 ksi).

Which is cheaper, EPS 150 or RIM PU Foam?

Both sit in the same relative cost tier ($$, standard); the part price will be decided by machining time, tolerance and quantity rather than by the material.

Which is easier to machine, EPS 150 or RIM PU Foam?

EPS 150. Its machinability rates excellent (88/100) against good (55/100) for RIM PU Foam; for welding the order is EPS 150 first (fair, 40/100) then RIM PU Foam (not recommended, 10/100).

Ready to make it?

Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in EPS 150 and RIM PU Foam 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.