Materials / Compare
Aluminum ADC12 vs. DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel
Compare Aluminum ADC12 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 | 149MPasourceone test result, 0.2% proof stress, as cast, ASTM tensile bar (Daiki) | 861MPasourcemean, as built, horizontal (N=72) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 345MPasourceone test result, as cast, ASTM tensile bar (Daiki) | 886MPasourcemean, as built, horizontal (N=72) |
| Elongation at break | 2.3%sourceone test result, as cast, ASTM tensile bar (Daiki) | 19.9%sourcemean at break, as built, horizontal |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 79.8GPasourcestandard value (S.S.Aluminum) | 197GPasourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition H 900 (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Density | 2,680kg/m³sourcemeasured (Daiki) | 7,790kg/m³sourcemean part density (ISO 3369) |
| Strength to weight | 55.6kN·m/kg | 110kN·m/kg1.99x higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 29.8MN·m/kg18% 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 | 5,457m/s | 5,029m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 125W/m·Ksourcemeasured on specimens cut from a 50 x 100 x 5 mm flat die casting (Daiki) | 17.9W/m·Ksourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition H 900, at 149 °C (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Thermal expansion | 21µm/m·Ksourcemeasured, temperature range not stated (Daiki) | 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 | 105µm growth | 52µm growth2.02x less |
| Specific heat | 911J/kg·Ksourcemeasured (Daiki) | 460J/kg·Ksourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition A, 0-100 °C (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 51.2mm²/s10.2x faster | 5mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | not sourced | 5,474W/m |
| Melting point | 515–582°Csourcesolidus-liquidus (Daiki) | not sourced |
| Values for | JIS ADC12 (Al-Si-Cu, about A383 / EN AC-46100) high-pressure die-casting alloy, as cast; physical properties from Daiki Aluminium Industry (ADC12 ingot producer) measured values; modulus from S.S.Aluminum (ADC12 ingot producer) standard values. | 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 ADC12 stronger than DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is stronger: its yield strength is 861 MPa against 149 MPa for Aluminum ADC12 (5.78x).
Which is lighter, Aluminum ADC12 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
Aluminum ADC12 is lighter: 2,680 kg/m³ against 7,790 kg/m³ for DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel.
Which is stiffer, Aluminum ADC12 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is stiffer: Young's modulus 197 GPa against 79.8 GPa for Aluminum ADC12, so the same part in DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Aluminum ADC12 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
For the same stiffness or strength: Aluminum ADC12 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension), stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate, strong panel or plate; DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is lighter for a strong rod or tie, strong beam.
| Part that must be | Aluminum ADC12 | DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 18% heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 1.85x heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 2.15x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | 1.99x heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | 11% heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 21% 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 ADC12 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
Aluminum ADC12 conducts heat better: 125 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 21 µm/m·K for Aluminum ADC12.
Among 72 materials
Related comparisons
- Aluminum ADC12 vs. Aluminum A380
- Aluminum ADC12 vs. Concrete
- Aluminum ADC12 vs. Aluminum 5052-H32
- Aluminum ADC12 vs. Aluminum 6063-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