Sorry, made a mistake with my math but I believe that my source is the correct one. I will show the correct mat later, but here is more on the sources.
My source is Cyro's official specifier "Physical Properties of Acrylite FF Acrylic Sheet". The is the acrylic that we currently use from Tru-Vue.
You can view the spcifier on the manuals page at
http://www.thepaperframer.com/acrylic/ffpp.pdf
This specifier was issued by Cyro - which was later purchased by Evonik. The Acrylic that we buy from Tru-Vue continues to be made by Evonik - I believe. It might be that Tru-Vue manufactures this under license from Envonik. In any case the physical properties will be the same.
This is the official specifier. As far as I know, nothing has superseded this specifier but if you can show a later source that proves me wrong....
Here is what the specifier says about expansion and contraction :
and if you go to Evoniks site at
http://cyro.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/400/kw/thermal%20expansion it says the same thing - with a little more explanation.
This is the manufacturer's official position - unless someone can show otherwise.
Now to correct my math.
.002" per degree for a 48" piece of acrylic = .005" per foot (I said per inch before). .002"/4 = .005" per foot per degree.
Multiplying that times 20 for 20 degrees gives us .005: * 20 = .01" per foot or 1/100th inch per foot for a 20 degree swing.
Multiplying that times 8 gives us .08" for 8 feet (.01 * 8 - .08") which is a little more than 1/16" over a full 8 feet.
Multiplying that times 5 for a full 100 degree swing gives us .4" which is in line with what the specifiers say above. That is for a full 100 degree swing. If the acrylic is cut at a temperature somewhat in the middle of the 100 degree swing then the overall expansion/contraction from the cutting temperatures will be about +-.2" over the full 8 feet.
But for those of use working with normal temperatures - a 1/16" over 8 feet for a 20 degree swing is not significant.
I also googled "expansion of acrylic" but didn't find any significant sources that shows the above to be off-base.
Here is a calculator I found if you want to do the math in metrics using expansion coefficients :
http://www.pmma.dk/Acryl_Expansion.aspx?Lang=en-GB
BTW, I'm not trying to be an a** about all this; this is an important subject and I want to be sure we all agree about this. Prove me wrong with some new official data from the manufacturers and I will admit it.