Materials / Compare
Ceramic Alumina 96% vs. Plastic PPS GF40
Compare Ceramic Alumina 96% vs. Plastic PPS GF40 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) | not given (tensile used) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 221MPasourcetypical tensile strength, 25 °C (ACMA Test #4) | 195MPasourcetensile strength, 5 mm/min |
| Compressive strength | 2,068MPasourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C773) | not sourced |
| Flexural strength | 358MPasourceflexural strength (MOR), 20 °C (ASTM-F417) | 285MPasourceflexural strength at break |
| Elongation at break | not sourced | 1.9%sourcestrain at break, 5 mm/min |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 303GPasourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C848) | 14.7GPasourcetypical, 1 mm/min |
| Density | 3,720kg/m³sourcetypical (ASTM-C20) | 1,650kg/m³sourcetypical |
| Strength to weight | 59.4kN·m/kg | 118kN·m/kg1.99x higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 81.5MN·m/kg9.14x higher | 8.91MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.21sourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C848) | 0.35sourceglass-reinforced Fortron PPS (class value, not grade-specific) |
| Shear modulus | 125GPa23x stiffer in shear | 5.44GPa |
| Bulk modulus | 174GPa | 16.3GPa |
| Speed of sound | 9,025m/s | 2,985m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 24.7W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C (ASTM-C408) | 0.2W/m·Ksource40% glass-reinforced Fortron, 25 °C (not grade-specific) |
| Thermal expansion | 8.2µm/m·Ksourcemean, 25-1000 °C (ASTM-C372) | 12µm/m·Ksourceparallel (flow), mean -50 to 90 °C |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 41µm growth46% less | 60µm growth |
| Specific heat | 880J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 100 °C (ASTM-E1269) | not sourced |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 7.55mm²/s | not sourced |
| Thermal shock resistance | 1,736W/m12.1x more resistant | 144W/m |
| Melting point | not sourced | 280°CsourceDSC, 10 °C/min |
| Glass transition | not sourced | 90°CsourceDSC, 10 °C/min |
| Max service temperature | not sourced | 270°CsourceHDT 1.8 MPa |
| 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. | Celanese Fortron 1140L4 (PPS, 40% glass fibre), injection moulding; FORTRON PPS Short-Term Properties Guide (PPS-012, 2016); thermal conductivity and Poisson for 40% glass-reinforced Fortron from the Fortron PPS Design Manual (PPS-050, 2013). |
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.
Questions
Is Ceramic Alumina 96% stronger than Plastic PPS GF40?
Ceramic Alumina 96% is stronger: its tensile strength is 221 MPa against 195 MPa for Plastic PPS GF40 (13%).
Which is lighter, Ceramic Alumina 96% or Plastic PPS GF40?
Plastic PPS GF40 is lighter: 1,650 kg/m³ against 3,720 kg/m³ for Ceramic Alumina 96%.
Which is stiffer, Ceramic Alumina 96% or Plastic PPS GF40?
Ceramic Alumina 96% is stiffer: Young's modulus 303 GPa against 14.7 GPa for Plastic PPS GF40, 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 Plastic PPS GF40?
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; Plastic PPS GF40 is lighter for a strong rod or tie, strong beam, strong panel or plate.
| Part that must be | Ceramic Alumina 96% | Plastic PPS GF40 |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 9.14x heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 2.01x heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 22% heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | 1.99x heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | 2.07x heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | 2.12x 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 Plastic PPS GF40?
Ceramic Alumina 96% conducts heat better: 24.7 W/m·K against 0.2 W/m·K for Plastic PPS GF40.
Which expands less with temperature?
Ceramic Alumina 96% expands less: 8.2 µm/m·K against 12 µm/m·K for Plastic PPS GF40.