Materials / Compare
Aluminum 2024-T351 vs. Brass C260
Compare Aluminum 2024-T351 vs. Brass C260 strength, stiffness, weight and thermal properties.
| Try it on a partA bracket to run stress or thermal on, free in your browser | Open in LessCAD | Open in LessCAD |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanical | ||
| Yield strength | 324MPasourcetypical, 0.2% offset, .500 in dia specimen | 345MPasourcenominal, strip/flat, 0.5% extension (not 0.2% offset) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 469MPasourcetypical | 427MPasourcenominal, strip/flat |
| Elongation at break | 19%sourcetypical, in 4D | 23%sourcenominal, in 2.0 in., strip/flat |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 73.1GPasourcetypical | 110GPasourcetypical, temper-independent |
| Density | 2,770kg/m³sourcenominal3.08x lighter | 8,525kg/m³sourcenominal |
| Strength to weight | 117kN·m/kg2.89x higher | 40.5kN·m/kg |
| Stiffness to weight | 26.4MN·m/kg2.04x higher | 12.9MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.33sourcetypical (handbook physical constant), all tempers | 0.34sourcereference value at room temperature (Wieland-M30 = CuZn30 = C26000, rolled products) |
| Shear modulus | 27.5GPa | 41.2GPa50% stiffer in shear |
| Bulk modulus | 71.7GPa | 115GPa |
| Speed of sound | 5,137m/s | 3,597m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 120W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 121W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C |
| Thermal expansion | 22.9µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | 20µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-300 °C |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 115µm growth | 100µm growth15% less |
| Specific heat | 875J/kg·Ksourcetypical, at 100 °C | 377J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 49.5mm²/s31% faster | 37.7mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 15,561W/m24% more resistant | 12,510W/m |
| Melting point | 502–638°Csourcemelting range | 916–954°Csourcesolidus-liquidus |
| Values for | 2024-T4/T351, Kaiser Aluminum sheet, coil & plate typical datasheet; Poisson from MIL-HDBK-5J | C26000 cartridge brass, H02 half hard flat/strip: CDA Electronic Connector Design Guide (mechanical) + CDA alloy page (physical) |
Every value links to the document that states it. "Not sourced" means no citable source states it (or only a specification minimum); figures computed from it are left out too.
Questions
Is Aluminum 2024-T351 stronger than Brass C260?
Brass C260 is stronger: its yield strength is 345 MPa against 324 MPa for Aluminum 2024-T351 (6%).
Which is lighter, Aluminum 2024-T351 or Brass C260?
Aluminum 2024-T351 is lighter: 2,770 kg/m³ against 8,525 kg/m³ for Brass C260.
Which is stiffer, Aluminum 2024-T351 or Brass C260?
Brass C260 is stiffer: Young's modulus 110 GPa against 73.1 GPa for Aluminum 2024-T351, so the same part in Brass C260 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Aluminum 2024-T351 or Brass C260?
For the same stiffness or strength: Aluminum 2024-T351 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension), stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate, strong rod or tie, strong beam, strong panel or plate.
| Part that must be | Aluminum 2024-T351 | Brass C260 |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 2.04x heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 2.51x heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 2.68x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | lighter | 2.89x heavier |
| Strong beam | lighter | 2.95x heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 2.98x heavier |
For the same stiffness or strength, mass scales with density over stiffness (or strength) raised to a power set by how the part is loaded: 1 for a rod in tension, 1/2 for a beam in bending, 1/3 for a panel (the standard material-selection indices).
Which conducts heat better, Aluminum 2024-T351 or Brass C260?
Brass C260 conducts heat better: 121 W/m·K against 120 W/m·K for Aluminum 2024-T351.
Which expands less with temperature?
Brass C260 expands less: 20 µm/m·K against 22.9 µm/m·K for Aluminum 2024-T351.