Materials / Compare
Aluminum 5052-H32 vs. Brass C260
Compare Aluminum 5052-H32 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 | 195MPasourcetypical, 0.2% offset | 345MPasourcenominal, strip/flat, 0.5% extension (not 0.2% offset) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 230MPasourcetypical | 427MPasourcenominal, strip/flat |
| Elongation at break | 12%sourcetypical | 23%sourcenominal, in 2.0 in., strip/flat |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 70GPasourcetypical | 110GPasourcetypical, temper-independent |
| Density | 2,685kg/m³sourcenominal3.18x lighter | 8,525kg/m³sourcenominal |
| Strength to weight | 72.6kN·m/kg1.79x higher | 40.5kN·m/kg |
| Stiffness to weight | 26.1MN·m/kg2.01x higher | 12.9MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.33sourcetypical (handbook physical constant) | 0.34sourcereference value at room temperature (Wieland-M30 = CuZn30 = C26000, rolled products) |
| Shear modulus | 26.3GPa | 41.2GPa1.56x stiffer in shear |
| Bulk modulus | 68.6GPa | 115GPa |
| Speed of sound | 5,106m/s | 3,597m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 138W/m·Ksourcebase material: 5052 in O temper (same alloy, annealed); Kaiser typical | 121W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C |
| Thermal expansion | 23.8µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | 20µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-300 °C |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 119µm growth | 100µm growth19% less |
| Specific heat | 963J/kg·Ksourceat 100 °C (212 °F); table covers O, H32, H34, H36, H38 | 377J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 53.4mm²/s41% faster | 37.7mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 10,822W/m | 12,510W/m16% more resistant |
| Melting point | 605–650°Csourcemelting range | 916–954°Csourcesolidus-liquidus |
| Values for | 5052-H32, Kaiser Aluminum tube & pipe typical datasheet (mechanical, CTE, melting); MIL-HDBK-5J (Poisson, density, specific heat) | 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 5052-H32 stronger than Brass C260?
Brass C260 is stronger: its yield strength is 345 MPa against 195 MPa for Aluminum 5052-H32 (1.77x).
Which is lighter, Aluminum 5052-H32 or Brass C260?
Aluminum 5052-H32 is lighter: 2,685 kg/m³ against 8,525 kg/m³ for Brass C260.
Which is stiffer, Aluminum 5052-H32 or Brass C260?
Brass C260 is stiffer: Young's modulus 110 GPa against 70 GPa for Aluminum 5052-H32, so the same part in Brass C260 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Aluminum 5052-H32 or Brass C260?
For the same stiffness or strength: Aluminum 5052-H32 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 5052-H32 | Brass C260 |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 2.01x heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 2.53x heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 2.73x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | lighter | 1.79x heavier |
| Strong beam | lighter | 2.17x heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 2.39x 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 5052-H32 or Brass C260?
Aluminum 5052-H32 conducts heat better: 138 W/m·K against 121 W/m·K for Brass C260.
Which expands less with temperature?
Brass C260 expands less: 20 µm/m·K against 23.8 µm/m·K for Aluminum 5052-H32.