Materials / Compare
Copper C110 vs. Plastic PEEK
Compare Copper C110 vs. Plastic PEEK 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 | 98MPasourcetypical, tensile yield |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 221MPasourcetypical | not sourced |
| Compressive strength | not sourced | 125MPasourcetypical, 23 C |
| Flexural strength | not sourced | 165MPasourcetypical, flexural stress at yield, 23 C |
| Elongation at break | 55%sourcetypical, 1 in. rod | 25%sourcetypical, at break |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 117GPasourcetypical | 4GPasourcetypical (nominal) |
| Density | 8,913kg/m³sourcenominal | 1,300kg/m³sourcetypical (crystalline) |
| Strength to weight | 7.74kN·m/kg | 75.4kN·m/kg9.74x higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 13.1MN·m/kg4.27x higher | 3.08MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.34sourcereference value at room temperature (Wieland-K32 = Cu-ETP = C11000, rolled products) | 0.38sourcetypical |
| Shear modulus | 43.7GPa30.2x stiffer in shear | 1.45GPa |
| Bulk modulus | 122GPa | 5.56GPa |
| Speed of sound | 3,626m/s | 1,754m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 391W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 0.29W/m·Ksourcetypical, average, 23 C |
| Thermal expansion | 16.9µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | 55µm/m·Ksourceaverage of flow/cross-flow, below Tg (<143 C) |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 84.5µm growth3.25x less | 275µm growth |
| Specific heat | 385J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 2,200J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 23 °C, DSC (Victrex PEEK 450G TDS, revision Jul 2012) |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 114mm²/s1,123x faster | 0.101mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 8,992W/m112x more resistant | 80.1W/m |
| Melting point | 1,065–1,083°Csourcesolidus-liquidus | 343°Csourcetypical, DSC |
| Glass transition | not sourced | 143°Csourceonset (midpoint 150 C) |
| Max service temperature | not sourced | 240°CsourceUL 746B RTI, mechanical strength (continuous use index) |
| Values for | C11000 ETP copper, annealed to 0.050 mm grain size (OS050), 1 in. rod, copper.org typical values | Victrex PEEK 450G (unreinforced, injection moulded), Victrex TDS rev. March 2026; Poisson from Victrex fluid-management flyer (2020-07) |
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 Plastic PEEK?
Plastic PEEK is stronger: its yield strength is 98 MPa against 69 MPa for Copper C110 (42%).
Which is lighter, Copper C110 or Plastic PEEK?
Plastic PEEK is lighter: 1,300 kg/m³ against 8,913 kg/m³ for Copper C110.
Which is stiffer, Copper C110 or Plastic PEEK?
Copper C110 is stiffer: Young's modulus 117 GPa against 4 GPa for Plastic PEEK, so the same part in Copper C110 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Copper C110 or Plastic PEEK?
For the same stiffness or strength: Copper C110 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension); Plastic PEEK is lighter for a stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate, strong rod or tie, strong beam, strong panel or plate.
| Part that must be | Copper C110 | Plastic PEEK |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 4.27x heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | 27% heavier | lighter |
| Stiff panel or plate | 2.22x heavier | lighter |
| Strong rod or tie | 9.74x heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | 8.66x heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | 8.17x 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 Plastic PEEK?
Copper C110 conducts heat better: 391 W/m·K against 0.29 W/m·K for Plastic PEEK.
Which expands less with temperature?
Copper C110 expands less: 16.9 µm/m·K against 55 µm/m·K for Plastic PEEK.