Blokle said:
A good engineer can listen to a non-engineer and understand what he means even when the latter doesn't use precise, correct terminology.
I would like to basically reiterate what
@russ_watters said.
I have worked with good engineers on several projects. Getting good answers/advise often involves a discussion with the experts. A lot of back and forth questions and answers to refine what is wanted.
That said, WRT your list:
- Low thermal conductivity
- Low chemical reactivity
- Low toxicity
- Thermal stability (constancy of properties over a wide temperature range of −100 to 250 °C)
- Does not support microbiological growth
- Resistance to oxygen, ozone, and ultraviolet (UV) light
- High gas permeability
Several of these properties:
- Low chemical reactivity
- Low toxicity
- Thermal stability (constancy of properties over a wide temperature range of −100 to 250 °C)
- Does not support microbiological growth
- Resistance to oxygen, ozone, and ultraviolet (UV) light
can be met by polycarbonates and related plastics which the properties vary across. (We used them to produce injection molded fish tanks for fish research labs.)
Not so sure about the resistance to oxygen, ozone, and ultraviolet (UV) light, but this would depend upon the degree of abuse the materials are exposed to. Probably something to quantify.
Never considered thermal conductivity.
Some of these plastics are are more susceptible to degrading in low pH (particular washing solutions)/high temperature (autoclaving conditions).
Resistance to these conditions often trade-off with resistance to breaking (structural strength or impact resistance I guess).
Some of the tanks (maybe 1 mm thick) we produced could probably be drop-kicked across a football field without breaking.
Resistance to UV can be improved by additives such as blue or black pigments (common in a lot of marine products), but these additives often come with toxicity problems (at least for baby fish).
This can get complex, so we would work with the engineers/producers to bioassay particular materials for toxic effects on our fish.
A simple and sensitive bioassay (we developed a good one for fish) becomes essential in the process of identifying suitable materials.
Lack of toxicity to one organism, does not mean a lack of toxicity to all. Some are particularly susceptible to certain compounds.
And again this involves a lot of back and forth discussion with the engineers.
Since your list is longer and probably more exclusive, it might become a more of a complicated process.
Understanding the intended use would be helpful.
When it comes to high gas permeability, you will probably have to be more specific (how much of what gas, through how thick of a material). As the surface area of the material is increased, the amount of gas exchanged will increase (which is why lungs and gills have high surface areas).
There are few plastics I am aware of that are what I would call very permeable to gasses.
This comes down to being able to keep fish alive in a bag of water with no air in it.
There are some commercially available fish bags (breather bags) that do this, but they are very thin plastic and not stiff.
I am also aware of a flexible plastic sheet used in a NASA Xenopus frog housing, on the space shuttle (which might be silicon based) that is used as the gas exchange surface for the container. (Had a friend who was working on a space shuttle project and had me consult on it.) The sheet was about .5 to 1.0 mm thick as I recall. Don't know details of the material, but I'll bet it was expensive.
Cost might also end up on your list.