FabDigitFabDigit

PUR/PIR Board vs RIM PU Foam

Polymer · grade comparison

PUR/PIR Board and RIM PU Foam are both polymer grades. RIM PU Foam is the stronger of the two: tensile strength 12 MPa (1.74 ksi) against 0.28 MPa (0.0406 ksi) for PUR/PIR Board, about 43 times as much. RIM PU Foam is the more ductile: elongation 130% versus 8% for PUR/PIR Board. PUR/PIR Board 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, PUR/PIR Board machines more easily (excellent vs good) and RIM PU Foam sits in a lower cost tier (standard, $$) than PUR/PIR Board (premium, $$$).

PUR/PIR BoardChoose 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.

PUR/PIR Board vs RIM PU Foam: properties

PUR/PIR BoardRIM PU Foam

Mechanical

Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.

Elastic (Young's) Modulus

0.01 GPa7.25×10⁻⁴ Msi
0.22 GPa0.03 Msi

Shear Modulus

0 GPa3.63×10⁻⁴ Msi
—

Poisson's Ratio

0.3
0.35

Tensile Strength (Ultimate)

0.28 MPa0.04 ksi
12 MPa1.7 ksi

Elongation at Break

8%
130%

Compressive Strength

0.16 MPa0.02 ksi
9 MPa1.3 ksi

Compressive Modulus

0.01 GPa8.7×10⁻⁴ Msi
0.2 GPa0.03 Msi

Flexural Strength

0.33 MPa0.05 ksi
14 MPa2 ksi

Flexural Modulus

0.01 GPa8.7×10⁻⁴ Msi
0.25 GPa0.04 Msi

Shear Strength

0.16 MPa0.02 ksi
7 MPa1 ksi

Compression Set (22 h, 70 °C)

3%
18%

Yield Strength (0.2% offset)

—
8 MPa1.2 ksi

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)

110°C230 °F
80°C176 °F

Water Absorption (24 h)

2%
0.6%

Water Absorption (Saturation)

5%
2.5%

Thermal

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

Thermal Conductivity

0.02 W/m·K0.01 BTU/hr·ft·°F
0.08 W/m·K0.05 BTU/hr·ft·°F

Specific Heat Capacity

1,450 J/kg·K0.35 BTU/lb·°F
1,700 J/kg·K0.41 BTU/lb·°F

Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)

60 µm/m·K33.3 µin/in·°F
120 µm/m·K66.7 µin/in·°F

Max Service Temperature (continuous)

100°C212 °F
95°C203 °F

Min Service Temperature

-180°C-292 °F
-40°C-40 °F

Limiting Oxygen Index

22%
20%

Max Service Temperature (short-term)

120°C248 °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

1×10¹¹ Ω·m3.94×10¹⁸ µΩ·in
1×10¹⁰ Ω·m3.94×10¹⁷ µΩ·in

Dielectric Constant (1 MHz)

1.08
2.8

Volume Resistivity

1×10¹³ Ω·cm
1×10¹² Ω·cm

Dielectric Strength

—
12 kV/mm305 V/mil

Dissipation Factor (1 MHz)

—
0.04

Surface Resistivity

—
1×10¹³ Ω

Comparative Tracking Index (CTI)

—
600 V

Chemical & Environmental

Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).

Corrosion Resistance

80 / 100
72 / 100

UV / Weathering Resistance

20 / 100
35 / 100

Manufacturability

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

Machinability

95 / 100
55 / 100

Weldability

5 / 100
10 / 100

Formability (cold)

10 / 100
25 / 100

Polishability

—
35 / 100

Mold Shrinkage

—
1.2%

Processing Melt Temperature (typ.)

—
40°C104 °F

Mold Temperature (typ.)

—
62°C144 °F

Sustainability

Primary-production footprint per kilogram.

Embodied Carbon (primary production)

5 kg CO₂/kg
4.6 kg CO₂/kg

Embodied Water

200 L/kg24 gal/lb
250 L/kg30 gal/lb

Typical Recycled Content

5%
3%

Same in both: Embodied Energy (primary production) 105 MJ/kg45,142 BTU/lb

Common Calculations

Ratios derived from the values above.

Specific Strength (UTS / density)

9 kN·m/kg
20 kN·m/kg

Specific Stiffness (E / density)

0.2 MN·m/kg
0.4 MN·m/kg

Thermal Diffusivity

0.5 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 scaleRIM PU Foam

Manufacturing and finishing

CapabilityPUR/PIR BoardRIM PU Foam
Default condition——
Relative cost$$$ Premium$$ Standard
Min. machined wall——
Best machined surface——

PUR/PIR Board vs RIM PU Foam — frequently asked

Is RIM PU Foam stronger than PUR/PIR Board?

Yes. RIM PU Foam has a typical tensile strength of 12 MPa (1.74 ksi) against 0.28 MPa (0.0406 ksi) for PUR/PIR Board — about 43 times as much.

Which is cheaper, PUR/PIR Board or RIM PU Foam?

RIM PU Foam is the lower-cost material: it sits in the standard tier ($$) while PUR/PIR Board is premium ($$$). 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, PUR/PIR Board or RIM PU Foam?

PUR/PIR Board. Its machinability rates excellent (95/100) against good (55/100) for RIM PU Foam; for welding the order is RIM PU Foam first (not recommended, 10/100) then PUR/PIR Board (not recommended, 5/100).

Ready to make it?

Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in PUR/PIR Board 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.