Materials / Compare
Ceramic Alumina 96% vs. DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium
Compare Ceramic Alumina 96% vs. DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium 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) | 1,100MPasourcetypical, as built, average of horizontal + vertical (M400) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 221MPasourcetypical tensile strength, 25 °C (ACMA Test #4) | 1,270MPasourcetypical, as built, average of horizontal + vertical (M400) |
| 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 | 8.7%sourcetypical at break, as built (M400) |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 303GPasourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C848) | 110GPasourcesame maker and process, sibling grade: EOS Titanium Ti64 (Grade 5) on EOS M 290, as built, XY and Z, typical |
| Density | 3,720kg/m³sourcetypical (ASTM-C20) | 4,400kg/m³sourcetypical part density (ISO 3369), M400 |
| Strength to weight | 59.4kN·m/kg | 250kN·m/kg4.21x higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 81.5MN·m/kg3.26x higher | 25MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.21sourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C848) | 0.342sourcewrought TIMETAL 6-4 (TIMET measurement, mean of 10); composition-level, not DMLS-measured |
| Shear modulus | 125GPa3.06x stiffer in shear | 41GPa |
| Bulk modulus | 174GPa | 116GPa |
| Speed of sound | 9,025m/s | 5,000m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 24.7W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C408) | 6.6W/m·Ksourcebase material: wrought Ti-6Al-4V / 6-4 ELI (TIMET datasheet), 20 °C |
| Thermal expansion | 8.2µm/m·Ksourcemean, 25-1000 °C (ASTM-C372) | 9µm/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 swing | 41µm growth10% less | 45µm growth |
| Specific heat | 880J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 100 °C (ASTM-E1269) | 580J/kg·Ksourcebase material: wrought Ti-6Al-4V / 6-4 ELI (TIMET datasheet), 20 °C |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 7.55mm²/s2.92x faster | 2.59mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 1,736W/m | 4,825W/m2.78x more resistant |
| Melting point | not sourced | 1,630–1,650°Csourcemelting range, wrought TIMETAL 6-4 (composition-level) |
| 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 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 Ceramic Alumina 96% stronger than DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium?
DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium is stronger: its yield strength is 1,100 MPa against tensile strength 221 MPa for Ceramic Alumina 96% (4.98x).
Which is lighter, Ceramic Alumina 96% or DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium?
Ceramic Alumina 96% is lighter: 3,720 kg/m³ against 4,400 kg/m³ for DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium.
Which is stiffer, Ceramic Alumina 96% or DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium?
Ceramic Alumina 96% is stiffer: Young's modulus 303 GPa against 110 GPa for DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium, 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 Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium?
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; DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium is lighter for a strong rod or tie, strong beam, strong panel or plate.
| Part that must be | Ceramic Alumina 96% | DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 3.26x heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 1.96x heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 1.66x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | 4.21x heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | 2.46x heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | 1.89x heavier | lighter |
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 Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium?
Ceramic Alumina 96% conducts heat better: 24.7 W/m·K against 6.6 W/m·K for DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium.
Which expands less with temperature?
Ceramic Alumina 96% expands less: 8.2 µm/m·K against 9 µm/m·K for DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium.
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 Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium vs. Titanium
- DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium vs. Titanium Ti-6Al-4V
- DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium vs. Stainless Steel 17-4PH
- DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium vs. Steel AISI 4340