What is the most incompressible elastomer?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the search for commercially available elastomers with exceptional incompressibility, particularly those with a Poisson ratio close to 0.5, to enhance performance in a specific application. The user aims to create a joint that is stiff axially while remaining compliant tangentially, utilizing a thin disk-shaped rubber pad. They reference the scaling of axial stiffness with Poisson's ratio and share insights from finite-element simulations supporting their approach. While wires are considered a backup option, the user prefers rubber pads for their simplicity in assembly. The conversation invites input on the feasibility of this rubber pad concept versus traditional wire or tape solutions.
Twigg
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
893
Reaction score
483
Hi all!

Usually, one would model a rubber as incompressible (##\nu \rightarrow \infty## or equivalently ##\kappa \rightarrow \infty##, where ##\nu## is Poisson ratio and ##\kappa## is bulk compressibility). However, I am trying to use rubber in an application where performance will improve the closer ##\nu## gets to 0.5. Are there any commercially available elastomers that are exceptionally incompressible (better than other elastomers)? (I know that relying on consistent material properties from something like rubber is generally a bad idea, but if this works it would be very convenient.)

For background, the reason I am doing this is to achieve a joint that is stiff axially and compliant tangentially. My thought was to use a thin disk-shaped pad of rubber. According to this reference (publisher link, open-access link), the axial stiffness of a thin cylindrical pad of rubber should scale like ##\frac{1}{1-2\nu}##, which will tend towards infinity as ##\nu \rightarrow 0.5##. In contrast, the transverse stiffness does not scale like this and does not explode as ##\nu \rightarrow \infty##. (See equations 3-3a (axial) and 3-3c (shear) in the linked reference for the exact formulae.) I've verified this trend with finite-element simulations (at least using a linear elastic material model, still working on a hyperelastic material model). But, this only works if the rubber's Poisson ratio is very close to 0.5 (the closer, the better). Hence my question above.

I realize that wires satisfy the same criteria above (stiff axially, compliant tangentially). But the rubber pads would be much simpler to implement in my application. Wires are my plan B if this rubber pad idea doesn't pan out.

Thanks in advance for your input!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Twigg said:
For background, the reason I am doing this is to achieve a joint that is stiff axially and compliant tangentially.
Hanging a mass from a support, using a flexible metal tape that is clamped at the ends, allows movement in one direction. One or two twisted tapes will give you two directions of freedom.
 
Baluncore said:
Hanging a mass from a support, using a flexible metal tape that is clamped at the ends, allows movement in one direction. One or two twisted tapes will give you two directions of freedom.
I think this is similar to my plan B of using a wire to suspend the mass. I agree this is definitely a cleaner way of getting the desired constraint. However, the rubber pads (if they work) would significantly simplify the assembly because I wouldn't need to add features to anchor the the wires or tapes to. (If this is a silly endeavour and I should give up and settle on wires/tapes, just let me know. Thanks!)
 
Thread 'What type of toilet do I have?'
I was enrolled in an online plumbing course at Stratford University. My plumbing textbook lists four types of residential toilets: 1# upflush toilets 2# pressure assisted toilets 3# gravity-fed, rim jet toilets and 4# gravity-fed, siphon-jet toilets. I know my toilet is not an upflush toilet because my toilet is not below the sewage line, and my toilet does not have a grinder and a pump next to it to propel waste upwards. I am about 99% sure that my toilet is not a pressure assisted...
After over 25 years of engineering, designing and analyzing bolted joints, I just learned this little fact. According to ASME B1.2, Gages and Gaging for Unified Inch Screw Threads: "The no-go gage should not pass over more than three complete turns when inserted into the internal thread of the product. " 3 turns seems like way to much. I have some really critical nuts that are of standard geometry (5/8"-11 UNC 3B) and have about 4.5 threads when you account for the chamfers on either...
Thread 'Physics of Stretch: What pressure does a band apply on a cylinder?'
Scenario 1 (figure 1) A continuous loop of elastic material is stretched around two metal bars. The top bar is attached to a load cell that reads force. The lower bar can be moved downwards to stretch the elastic material. The lower bar is moved downwards until the two bars are 1190mm apart, stretching the elastic material. The bars are 5mm thick, so the total internal loop length is 1200mm (1190mm + 5mm + 5mm). At this level of stretch, the load cell reads 45N tensile force. Key numbers...

Similar threads

Replies
35
Views
28K
Back
Top