Materials / Compare
Ceramic Alumina 96% vs. DMLS 316L Stainless Steel
Compare Ceramic Alumina 96% vs. DMLS 316L Stainless Steel strength, stiffness, weight and thermal properties.
| Try it on a partA sample part to run stress or thermal on, free in your browser | Open in LessCAD | Open in LessCAD |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanical | ||
| Yield strength | not given (tensile used) | 530MPasourcetypical, as manufactured, horizontal |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 221MPasourcetypical tensile strength, 25 °C (ACMA Test #4) | 640MPasourcetypical, as manufactured, horizontal |
| Compressive strength | 2,068MPasourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C773) | not sourced |
| Flexural strength | 358MPasourceflexural strength (MOR), 20 °C (ASTM-F417) | not sourced |
| Elongation at break | not sourced | 40%sourcetypical at break, as manufactured, horizontal |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 303GPasourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C848) | 185GPasourcetypical, as built, horizontal (XY); EOSINT M280-400W / M290-400W, 316L_Surface 1.0, 20 µm (2014 sheet) |
| Density | 3,720kg/m³sourcetypical (ASTM-C20) | 7,900kg/m³sourcepart density (ISO 3369, not labelled min or typical), EOS M 290, 40 µm FlexLine |
| Strength to weight | 59.4kN·m/kg | 67.1kN·m/kg13% higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 81.5MN·m/kg3.48x higher | 23.4MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.21sourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C848) | 0.3sourcebase material: austenitic stainless steels incl. 1.4404 (316L), design value |
| Shear modulus | 125GPa1.76x stiffer in shear | 71.2GPa |
| Bulk modulus | 174GPa | 154GPa |
| Speed of sound | 9,025m/s | 4,839m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 24.7W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C408) | 16.2W/m·Ksourcebase material: wrought 316/316L (Cleveland-Cliffs), at 100 °C |
| Thermal expansion | 8.2µm/m·Ksourcemean, 25-1000 °C (ASTM-C372) | 15.7µm/m·Ksourcemean 25-100 °C, ASTM E228 |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 41µm growth1.92x less | 78.6µm growth |
| Specific heat | 880J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 100 °C (ASTM-E1269) | 500J/kg·Ksourcebase material: wrought 316/316L (Cleveland-Cliffs), 0-100 °C |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 7.55mm²/s1.84x faster | 4.1mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 1,736W/m | 2,067W/m19% more resistant |
| Values for | CoorsTek AD-96, nominal 96% Al2O3 sintered alumina, typical values; CoorsTek "Ceramic Seal Material Properties" (© 2018, 01899 F). AD-96 is the general 96% grade, not the ADS-96R substrate grade. | EOS StainlessSteel 316L (powder 9011-0032), EOS M 290, ParameterSet 316L 20µm Surface M290/400W, as manufactured, horizontal; ISO 6892-1 |
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 316L Stainless Steel is 3D printed: its properties depend on build direction and print settings; these are typical values.
Questions
Is Ceramic Alumina 96% stronger than DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
DMLS 316L Stainless Steel is stronger: its yield strength is 530 MPa against tensile strength 221 MPa for Ceramic Alumina 96% (2.4x).
Which is lighter, Ceramic Alumina 96% or DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
Ceramic Alumina 96% is lighter: 3,720 kg/m³ against 7,900 kg/m³ for DMLS 316L Stainless Steel.
Which is stiffer, Ceramic Alumina 96% or DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
Ceramic Alumina 96% is stiffer: Young's modulus 303 GPa against 185 GPa for DMLS 316L Stainless Steel, so the same part in Ceramic Alumina 96% deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Ceramic Alumina 96% or DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
For the same stiffness or strength: Ceramic Alumina 96% is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension), stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate, strong beam, strong panel or plate; DMLS 316L Stainless Steel is lighter for a strong rod or tie.
| Part that must be | Ceramic Alumina 96% | DMLS 316L Stainless Steel |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 3.48x heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 2.72x heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 2.5x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | 13% heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | lighter | 19% heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 37% 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, Ceramic Alumina 96% or DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
Ceramic Alumina 96% conducts heat better: 24.7 W/m·K against 16.2 W/m·K for DMLS 316L Stainless Steel.
Which expands less with temperature?
Ceramic Alumina 96% expands less: 8.2 µm/m·K against 15.7 µm/m·K for DMLS 316L Stainless Steel.
Among 72 materials
Related comparisons
- Ceramic Alumina 96% vs. Ceramic Aluminum Nitride
- Ceramic Alumina 96% vs. Concrete
- Ceramic Alumina 96% vs. Iron
- Ceramic Alumina 96% vs. Stainless Steel 303
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel AISI 1045
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel A992
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel AISI 1018