Materials / Compare

Brass C360 vs. DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium

Compare Brass C360 vs. DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium strength, stiffness, weight and thermal properties.

Change either side
Brass C360Wrought
DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium3D printed metal (DMLS)
Try it on a partA bracket to run stress or thermal on, free in your browserOpen in LessCADOpen in LessCAD
Mechanical
Yield strength310MPasourcetypical, 0.5% extension under load1,100MPasourcetypical, as built, average of horizontal + vertical (M400)
Ultimate tensile strength400MPasourcetypical1,270MPasourcetypical, as built, average of horizontal + vertical (M400)
Elongation at break25%sourcetypical, 1 in. rod8.7%sourcetypical at break, as built (M400)
Young's modulus (stiffness)96.5GPasourcetypical, temper-independent110GPasourcesame maker and process, sibling grade: EOS Titanium Ti64 (Grade 5) on EOS M 290, as built, XY and Z, typical
Density8,498kg/m³sourcenominal4,400kg/m³sourcetypical part density (ISO 3369), M400
Strength to weight36.5kN·m/kg250kN·m/kg6.85x higher
Stiffness to weight11.4MN·m/kg25MN·m/kg2.2x higher
Poisson's ratio0.34sourcebase material: leaded free-machining brass CuZn39Pb2 (C37700), Wieland-Z30 rolled products, reference value at room temperature0.342sourcewrought TIMETAL 6-4 (TIMET measurement, mean of 10); composition-level, not DMLS-measured
Shear modulus36GPa41GPa14% stiffer in shear
Bulk modulus101GPa116GPa
Speed of sound3,370m/s5,000m/s
Thermal
Thermal conductivity116W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C6.6W/m·Ksourcebase material: wrought Ti-6Al-4V / 6-4 ELI (TIMET datasheet), 20 °C
Thermal expansion20.5µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-300 °C9µm/m·Ksourcemean 25-100 °C, ASTM E228; EOS Ti64 Grade 23 (=ELI) on EOS M 290 40 µm; condition not stated (sheet's mechanical data are heat treated)
100 mm part over a 50 °C swing103µm growth45µm growth2.28x less
Specific heat377J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C580J/kg·Ksourcebase material: wrought Ti-6Al-4V / 6-4 ELI (TIMET datasheet), 20 °C
Heats up and cools (diffusivity)36.2mm²/s14x faster2.59mm²/s
Thermal shock resistance11,997W/m2.49x more resistant4,825W/m
Melting point888–899°Csourcesolidus-liquidus1,630–1,650°Csourcemelting range, wrought TIMETAL 6-4 (composition-level)
Values forC36000 free-cutting brass, H02 half-hard rod 1 in. section (20% cold work), copper.org typical valuesEOS Titanium Ti64ELI (powder 9011-0040; ASTM F136/F3001, i.e. Grade 23) on EOS M400 SF, parameter set Ti64ELI_030_FlexM400_100, 30 µm, as built; ISO 6892-1 A14

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 Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium is 3D printed: its properties depend on build direction and print settings; these are typical values.

Questions

Is Brass C360 stronger than DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium?

DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium is stronger: its yield strength is 1,100 MPa against 310 MPa for Brass C360 (3.55x).

Which is lighter, Brass C360 or DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium?

DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium is lighter: 4,400 kg/m³ against 8,498 kg/m³ for Brass C360.

Which is stiffer, Brass C360 or DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium?

DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium is stiffer: Young's modulus 110 GPa against 96.5 GPa for Brass C360, so the same part in DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium deflects less under the same load.

Which is lighter for the same job, Brass C360 or DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium?

For the same stiffness or strength: DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium 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 beBrass C360DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium
Stiff rod or tie (tension)2.2x heavierlighter
Stiff beam (bending)2.06x heavierlighter
Stiff panel or plate2.02x heavierlighter
Strong rod or tie6.85x heavierlighter
Strong beam4.49x heavierlighter
Strong panel or plate3.64x heavierlighter

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, Brass C360 or DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium?

Brass C360 conducts heat better: 116 W/m·K against 6.6 W/m·K for DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium.

Which expands less with temperature?

DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium expands less: 9 µm/m·K against 20.5 µm/m·K for Brass C360.

Among 59 materials

1k10k0.1110100Density (kg/m³)Young's modulus (GPa)Plastic PLAPlastic PETGPlastic ABSPlastic TPUPlastic NylonAluminumSteelIronTitaniumSteel AISI 1018Stainless 304Stainless 316Aluminum 6061-T6Aluminum 7075-T6Copper 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 PolycarbonateFDM PAHT-CFFDM HIPSSLA Resin Tough 2000SLS PA12 NylonDMLS AlSi10Mg AluminumDMLS 316L Stainless SteelDMLS 17-4PH Stainless SteelBrass C360DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium
Stiffness against density
1k10k101001kDensity (kg/m³)Yield strength (MPa)Plastic PLAPlastic PETGPlastic ABSPlastic TPUPlastic NylonRubberAluminumSteelIronTitaniumSteel AISI 1018Stainless 304Stainless 316Aluminum 6061-T6Aluminum 7075-T6Copper 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 PolycarbonateFDM PAHT-CFFDM HIPSSLA Resin Tough 2000SLA Resin Elastic 50ASLS PA12 NylonDMLS AlSi10Mg AluminumDMLS 316L Stainless SteelDMLS 17-4PH Stainless SteelBrickBrass C360DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium
Strength against density

Related comparisons