Materials / Compare
Aluminum 5052-H32 vs. Zinc Zamak 3
Compare Aluminum 5052-H32 vs. Zinc Zamak 3 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 | 221MPasourcetypical |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 230MPasourcetypical | 283MPasourcetypical23% stronger |
| Elongation at break | 12%sourcetypical | 10%sourcetypical, in 2 in. |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 70GPasourcetypical | 85.5GPasourcetypical22% stiffer |
| Density | 2,685kg/m³sourcenominal | 6,600kg/m³sourcetypical |
| Strength to weight | 72.6kN·m/kg2.17x higher | 33.5kN·m/kg |
| Stiffness to weight | 26.1MN·m/kg2.01x higher | 13MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.33sourcetypical (handbook physical constant) | 0.27sourcetypical, Zamak 3 hot-chamber die cast |
| Shear modulus | 26.3GPa | 33.7GPa28% stiffer in shear |
| Bulk modulus | 68.6GPa | 62GPa |
| Speed of sound | 5,106m/s | 3,599m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 138W/m·Ksourcebase material: 5052 in O temper (same alloy, annealed); Kaiser typical | 113W/m·Ksourcetypical |
| Thermal expansion | 23.8µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | 27.4µm/m·Ksourcetypical |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 119µm growth15% less | 137µm growth |
| Specific heat | 963J/kg·Ksourceat 100 °C (212 °F); table covers O, H32, H34, H36, H38 | 419J/kg·Ksourcetypical |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 53.4mm²/s31% faster | 40.9mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 10,822W/m39% more resistant | 7,782W/m |
| Melting point | 605–650°Csourcemelting range | 381–387°Csourcemelting range |
| Values for | 5052-H32, Kaiser Aluminum tube & pipe typical datasheet (mechanical, CTE, melting); MIL-HDBK-5J (Poisson, density, specific heat) | Zamak 3 (ASTM B86 die cast), Nathan Trotter (zinc alloy producer) technical data sheet, typical values |
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 Zinc Zamak 3?
Zinc Zamak 3 is stronger: its yield strength is 221 MPa against 195 MPa for Aluminum 5052-H32 (13%).
Which is lighter, Aluminum 5052-H32 or Zinc Zamak 3?
Aluminum 5052-H32 is lighter: 2,685 kg/m³ against 6,600 kg/m³ for Zinc Zamak 3.
Which is stiffer, Aluminum 5052-H32 or Zinc Zamak 3?
Zinc Zamak 3 is stiffer: Young's modulus 85.5 GPa against 70 GPa for Aluminum 5052-H32, so the same part in Zinc Zamak 3 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Aluminum 5052-H32 or Zinc Zamak 3?
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 | Zinc Zamak 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 2.01x heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 2.22x heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 2.3x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | lighter | 2.17x heavier |
| Strong beam | lighter | 2.26x heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 2.31x 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 Zinc Zamak 3?
Aluminum 5052-H32 conducts heat better: 138 W/m·K against 113 W/m·K for Zinc Zamak 3.
Which expands less with temperature?
Aluminum 5052-H32 expands less: 23.8 µm/m·K against 27.4 µm/m·K for Zinc Zamak 3.