Materials / Compare
Copper C110 vs. Magnesium AZ31B-H24
Compare Copper C110 vs. Magnesium AZ31B-H24 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 | 69MPasourcetypical, 0.5% extension under load | 220MPasourcetypical, H24, 0.5-6 mm, 0.2 % proof stress |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 221MPasourcetypical | 290MPasourcetypical, H24, 0.5-6 mm |
| Elongation at break | 55%sourcetypical, 1 in. rod | 13%sourcetypical, H24, 0.5-6 mm, gauge 5.65√A |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 117GPasourcetypical | 44.8GPasourcetypical (handbook physical constant) |
| Density | 8,913kg/m³sourcenominal | 1,769kg/m³sourcenominal5.04x lighter |
| Strength to weight | 7.74kN·m/kg | 124kN·m/kg16.1x higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 13.1MN·m/kg | 25.3MN·m/kg1.93x higher |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.34sourcereference value at room temperature (Wieland-K32 = Cu-ETP = C11000, rolled products) | 0.35sourcetypical (handbook physical constant) |
| Shear modulus | 43.7GPa2.64x stiffer in shear | 16.6GPa |
| Bulk modulus | 122GPa | 49.8GPa |
| Speed of sound | 3,626m/s | 5,032m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 391W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 76.9W/m·Ksourcetypical (temper/temperature not stated) |
| Thermal expansion | 16.9µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | 26.8µm/m·Ksourcetypical (temperature range not stated) |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 84.5µm growth1.59x less | 134µm growth |
| Specific heat | 385J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 1,040J/kg·Ksourcetypical |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 114mm²/s2.73x faster | 41.8mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 8,992W/m | 9,159W/m2% more resistant |
| Melting point | 1,065–1,083°Csourcesolidus-liquidus | not sourced |
| Max service temperature | not sourced | 149°Csourcestated application limit |
| Values for | C11000 ETP copper, annealed to 0.050 mm grain size (OS050), 1 in. rod, copper.org typical values | AZ31B-H24 sheet 0.016-0.062 in., MIL-HDBK-5J Table 4.2.1.0(b) (AMS 4377); strengths are S-basis MINIMUMS |
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 Copper C110 stronger than Magnesium AZ31B-H24?
Magnesium AZ31B-H24 is stronger: its yield strength is 220 MPa against 69 MPa for Copper C110 (3.19x).
Which is lighter, Copper C110 or Magnesium AZ31B-H24?
Magnesium AZ31B-H24 is lighter: 1,769 kg/m³ against 8,913 kg/m³ for Copper C110.
Which is stiffer, Copper C110 or Magnesium AZ31B-H24?
Copper C110 is stiffer: Young's modulus 117 GPa against 44.8 GPa for Magnesium AZ31B-H24, so the same part in Copper C110 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Copper C110 or Magnesium AZ31B-H24?
For the same stiffness or strength: Magnesium AZ31B-H24 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 be | Copper C110 | Magnesium AZ31B-H24 |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | 1.93x heavier | lighter |
| Stiff beam (bending) | 3.12x heavier | lighter |
| Stiff panel or plate | 3.66x heavier | lighter |
| Strong rod or tie | 16.1x heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | 10.9x heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | 9x 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, Copper C110 or Magnesium AZ31B-H24?
Copper C110 conducts heat better: 391 W/m·K against 76.9 W/m·K for Magnesium AZ31B-H24.
Which expands less with temperature?
Copper C110 expands less: 16.9 µm/m·K against 26.8 µm/m·K for Magnesium AZ31B-H24.