Materials / Compare
Aluminum 6063-T6 vs. DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel
Compare Aluminum 6063-T6 vs. DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel 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 | 215MPasourcetypical, T6, 0.0625 in specimen | 861MPasourcemean, as built, horizontal (N=72) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 240MPasourcetypical, T6 | 886MPasourcemean, as built, horizontal (N=72) |
| Elongation at break | 12%sourcetypical, T6, in 4D | 19.9%sourcemean at break, as built, horizontal |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 69GPasourcetypical | 197GPasourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition H 900 (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Density | 2,700kg/m³sourcenominal, 20 °C | 7,790kg/m³sourcemean part density (ISO 3369) |
| Strength to weight | 79.6kN·m/kg | 110kN·m/kg39% higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 25.6MN·m/kg1% higher | 25.3MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | not sourced | 0.272sourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, all conditions (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Shear modulus | not sourced | 77.4GPa |
| Bulk modulus | not sourced | 144GPa |
| Speed of sound | 5,055m/s | 5,029m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 201W/m·Ksourcetypical, T6, 20 °C | 17.9W/m·Ksourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition H 900, at 149 °C (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Thermal expansion | 23.4µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | 10.4µm/m·Ksourcemean 25-100 °C, ASTM E228, AFTER atmospheric heat treatment (as-built value not published) |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 117µm growth | 52µm growth2.25x less |
| Specific heat | 901J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C (Hydro EN AW-6063) | 460J/kg·Ksourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition A, 0-100 °C (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 82.6mm²/s16.5x faster | 5mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | not sourced | 5,474W/m |
| Melting point | 615–655°Csourcemelting range | not sourced |
| Values for | 6063-T6 extruded tube, Kaiser Aluminum Tube & Pipe Alloy 6063 Technical Data (Rev. 05/06), typical properties; specific heat from Hydro EN AW-6063 extruded-products datasheet (Rev.4, 03/2023). | EOS StainlessSteel 17-4PH IndustryLine (powder 9011-0041), EOS M 290, 40 µm, default job 17-4PH_040_StainlessM291_100, as built, horizontal; ISO 6892 & ASTM E8M |
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.
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is 3D printed: its properties depend on build direction and print settings; these are typical values.
Questions
Is Aluminum 6063-T6 stronger than DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is stronger: its yield strength is 861 MPa against 215 MPa for Aluminum 6063-T6 (4x).
Which is lighter, Aluminum 6063-T6 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
Aluminum 6063-T6 is lighter: 2,700 kg/m³ against 7,790 kg/m³ for DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel.
Which is stiffer, Aluminum 6063-T6 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is stiffer: Young's modulus 197 GPa against 69 GPa for Aluminum 6063-T6, so the same part in DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Aluminum 6063-T6 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
For the same stiffness or strength: Aluminum 6063-T6 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension), stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate, strong beam, strong panel or plate; DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is lighter for a strong rod or tie.
| Part that must be | Aluminum 6063-T6 | DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 1% heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 1.71x heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 2.03x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | 39% heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | lighter | 14% heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 44% 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 6063-T6 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
Aluminum 6063-T6 conducts heat better: 201 W/m·K against 17.9 W/m·K for DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel.
Which expands less with temperature?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel expands less: 10.4 µm/m·K against 23.4 µm/m·K for Aluminum 6063-T6.
Among 72 materials
Related comparisons
- Aluminum 6063-T6 vs. Aluminum 5052-H32
- Aluminum 6063-T6 vs. DMLS AlSi10Mg Aluminum
- Aluminum 6063-T6 vs. Aluminum
- Aluminum 6063-T6 vs. Aluminum 6061-T6
- DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel vs. Steel AISI 4340
- DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel vs. Nickel Inconel 718
- DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel vs. Stainless Steel 17-4PH
- DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel vs. Steel AISI 1045