Materials / Compare
Copper C110 vs. Stainless 17-4PH
Compare Copper C110 vs. Stainless 17-4PH 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 | 1,275MPasourcetypical, transverse, sheet/strip |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 221MPasourcetypical | 1,379MPasourcetypical, transverse, sheet/strip |
| Elongation at break | 55%sourcetypical, 1 in. rod | 9%sourcetypical, transverse, in 2 in. (50.8 mm) |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 117GPasourcetypical | 197GPasourceH 900 |
| Density | 8,913kg/m³sourcenominal | 7,800kg/m³sourceH 900 |
| Strength to weight | 7.74kN·m/kg | 163kN·m/kg21.1x higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 13.1MN·m/kg | 25.3MN·m/kg1.92x higher |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.34sourcereference value at room temperature (Wieland-K32 = Cu-ETP = C11000, rolled products) | 0.272sourceH 900 (column) |
| Shear modulus | 43.7GPa | 77.4GPa1.77x stiffer in shear |
| Bulk modulus | 122GPa | 144GPa |
| Speed of sound | 3,626m/s | 5,026m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 391W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 17.9W/m·Ksourceat 149 °C (300 °F), H 900 |
| Thermal expansion | 16.9µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | 10.8µm/m·Ksourcemean, 21–93 °C (70–200 °F), H 900 |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 84.5µm growth | 54µm growth1.56x less |
| Specific heat | 385J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 460J/kg·Ksourcemean, 0–100 °C, H 900 |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 114mm²/s22.8x faster | 4.99mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 8,992W/m15% more resistant | 7,809W/m |
| Melting point | 1,065–1,083°Csourcesolidus-liquidus | not sourced |
| Max service temperature | not sourced | 316°Csourcestrength-retention limit (not oxidation) |
| Values for | C11000 ETP copper, annealed to 0.050 mm grain size (OS050), 1 in. rod, copper.org typical values | Cleveland-Cliffs 17-4 PH, Condition H 900, sheet/strip, transverse (Product Data Bulletin, May 2021) |
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 Stainless 17-4PH?
Stainless 17-4PH is stronger: its yield strength is 1,275 MPa against 69 MPa for Copper C110 (18.5x).
Which is lighter, Copper C110 or Stainless 17-4PH?
Stainless 17-4PH is lighter: 7,800 kg/m³ against 8,913 kg/m³ for Copper C110.
Which is stiffer, Copper C110 or Stainless 17-4PH?
Stainless 17-4PH is stiffer: Young's modulus 197 GPa against 117 GPa for Copper C110, so the same part in Stainless 17-4PH deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Copper C110 or Stainless 17-4PH?
For the same stiffness or strength: Stainless 17-4PH 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 | Stainless 17-4PH |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | 1.92x heavier | lighter |
| Stiff beam (bending) | 48% heavier | lighter |
| Stiff panel or plate | 36% heavier | lighter |
| Strong rod or tie | 21.1x heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | 7.99x heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | 4.91x 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 Stainless 17-4PH?
Copper C110 conducts heat better: 391 W/m·K against 17.9 W/m·K for Stainless 17-4PH.
Which expands less with temperature?
Stainless 17-4PH expands less: 10.8 µm/m·K against 16.9 µm/m·K for Copper C110.