Materials / Compare

Aluminum 6061-T6 vs. FDM Polycarbonate

Compare Aluminum 6061-T6 vs. FDM Polycarbonate strength, stiffness, weight and thermal properties.

Change either side
Aluminum 6061-T6Wrought
FDM Polycarbonate3D printed (FDM)
Try it on a partA bracket to run stress or thermal on, free in your browserOpen in LessCADOpen in LessCAD
Mechanical
Yield strength276MPasourcetypical, 0.2% offset, .500 in dia specimen53.3MPasourcetypical
Ultimate tensile strength310MPasourcetypical53.3MPasourcetypical, peak stress (= stress at yield)
Flexural strengthnot sourced89.4MPasourcetypical
Elongation at break17%sourcetypical, in 4D, 0.500 in dia specimen9.2%sourcetypical
Young's modulus (stiffness)68.3GPasourcetypical28.5x stiffer2.39GPasourcetypical
Density2,700kg/m³sourcenominal1,180–1,200kg/m³sourcerange
Strength to weight102kN·m/kg2.28x higher44.8kN·m/kg
Stiffness to weight25.3MN·m/kg12.6x higher2.01MN·m/kg
Poisson's ratio0.33sourcetypical (handbook physical constant)0.38sourcebase material: polycarbonate family typical (Covestro Part and Mold Design guide, Table 3-1)
Shear modulus25.7GPa29.6x stiffer in shear0.867GPa
Bulk modulus67GPa3.33GPa
Speed of sound5,030m/s1,418m/s
Thermal
Thermal conductivity167W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C0.2W/m·Ksourcebase material: Covestro Makrolon 2405 injection-molding PC, typical, through-plane, 23 °C
Thermal expansion23.6µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C65µm/m·Ksourcebase material: Covestro Makrolon 2405 injection-molding PC, typical, 23-55 °C, parallel
100 mm part over a 50 °C swing118µm growth2.75x less325µm growth
Specific heat896J/kg·Ksourcetypical, at 100 °Cnot sourced
Heats up and cools (diffusivity)69mm²/snot sourced
Thermal shock resistance19,159W/m451x more resistant42.5W/m
Melting point582–652°Csourcesolidus-liquidusnot sourced
Glass transitionnot sourced108°Csourcetypical
Max service temperaturenot sourced105°CsourceHDT 0.455 MPa (printed specimens)
Values for6061-T6/T651, Kaiser Aluminum typical properties; Poisson from MIL-HDBK-5JUltimaker PC, 3D-printed specimens, XY (flat); Ultimaker S5 Pro, engineering intent profile, 0.15 mm layer height, AA 0.4 print core, 100% infill, Cura 4.9, printed one-at-a-time, conditioned >=24 h at room temperature. TDS (file v5.00), April 20, 2022.

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.

FDM Polycarbonate is 3D printed: its properties depend on build direction and print settings; these are typical values.

Questions

Is Aluminum 6061-T6 stronger than FDM Polycarbonate?

Aluminum 6061-T6 is stronger: its yield strength is 276 MPa against 53.3 MPa for FDM Polycarbonate (5.18x).

Which is lighter, Aluminum 6061-T6 or FDM Polycarbonate?

FDM Polycarbonate is lighter: 1,190 kg/m³ against 2,700 kg/m³ for Aluminum 6061-T6.

Which is stiffer, Aluminum 6061-T6 or FDM Polycarbonate?

Aluminum 6061-T6 is stiffer: Young's modulus 68.3 GPa against 2.39 GPa for FDM Polycarbonate, so the same part in Aluminum 6061-T6 deflects less under the same load.

Which is lighter for the same job, Aluminum 6061-T6 or FDM Polycarbonate?

For the same stiffness or strength: Aluminum 6061-T6 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension), stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate, strong rod or tie, strong beam.

Part that must beAluminum 6061-T6FDM Polycarbonate
Stiff rod or tie (tension)lighter12.6x heavier
Stiff beam (bending)lighter2.35x heavier
Stiff panel or platelighter35% heavier
Strong rod or tielighter2.28x heavier
Strong beamlighter32% heavier
Strong panel or plateabout equalabout equal

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 6061-T6 or FDM Polycarbonate?

Aluminum 6061-T6 conducts heat better: 167 W/m·K against 0.2 W/m·K for FDM Polycarbonate.

Which expands less with temperature?

Aluminum 6061-T6 expands less: 23.6 µm/m·K against 65 µm/m·K for FDM Polycarbonate.

Among 59 materials

1k10k0.1110100Density (kg/m³)Young's modulus (GPa)Plastic PLAPlastic PETGPlastic ABSPlastic TPUPlastic NylonAluminumSteelIronTitaniumSteel AISI 1018Stainless 304Stainless 316Aluminum 7075-T6Brass C360Copper C110GlassSteel AISI 1045Steel AISI 4340Steel A992Stainless 303Stainless 17-4PHAluminum 2024-T351Aluminum 5052-H32Aluminum 7050-T7451Titanium Ti-6Al-4VBrass C260Nickel Inconel 718Magnesium AZ31B-H24Zinc Zamak 3Plastic ABS (bulk/injection)Plastic PolycarbonatePlastic POM/AcetalPlastic Nylon PA6Plastic Nylon PA66Plastic PEEKPlastic UHMWPEPlastic HDPEPlastic PolypropylenePlastic PMMAFDM ASAFDM PAHT-CFFDM HIPSSLA Resin Tough 2000SLS PA12 NylonDMLS AlSi10Mg AluminumDMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI TitaniumDMLS 316L Stainless SteelDMLS 17-4PH Stainless SteelAluminum 6061-T6FDM Polycarbonate
Stiffness against density
1k10k101001kDensity (kg/m³)Yield strength (MPa)Plastic PLAPlastic PETGPlastic ABSPlastic TPUPlastic NylonRubberAluminumSteelIronTitaniumSteel AISI 1018Stainless 304Stainless 316Aluminum 7075-T6Brass C360Copper C110GlassSteel AISI 1045Steel AISI 4340Steel A992Stainless 303Stainless 17-4PHAluminum 2024-T351Aluminum 5052-H32Aluminum 7050-T7451Titanium Ti-6Al-4VBrass C260Nickel Inconel 718Magnesium AZ31B-H24Zinc Zamak 3Plastic ABS (bulk/injection)Plastic PolycarbonatePlastic POM/AcetalPlastic Nylon PA6Plastic Nylon PA66Plastic PEEKPlastic PTFEPlastic UHMWPEPlastic HDPEPlastic PolypropylenePlastic PMMAFDM ASAFDM PAHT-CFFDM HIPSSLA Resin Tough 2000SLA Resin Elastic 50ASLS PA12 NylonDMLS AlSi10Mg AluminumDMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI TitaniumDMLS 316L Stainless SteelDMLS 17-4PH Stainless SteelBrickAluminum 6061-T6FDM Polycarbonate
Strength against density

Related comparisons