Materials / Compare
Copper C110 vs. DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel
Compare Copper C110 vs. DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel 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 | 861MPasourcemean, as built, horizontal (N=72) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 221MPasourcetypical | 886MPasourcemean, as built, horizontal (N=72) |
| Elongation at break | 55%sourcetypical, 1 in. rod | 19.9%sourcemean at break, as built, horizontal |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 117GPasourcetypical | 197GPasourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition H 900 (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Density | 8,913kg/m³sourcenominal | 7,790kg/m³sourcemean part density (ISO 3369) |
| Strength to weight | 7.74kN·m/kg | 110kN·m/kg14.3x 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) | 0.272sourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, all conditions (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Shear modulus | 43.7GPa | 77.4GPa1.77x stiffer in shear |
| Bulk modulus | 122GPa | 144GPa |
| Speed of sound | 3,626m/s | 5,029m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 391W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 17.9W/m·Ksourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition H 900, at 149 °C (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Thermal expansion | 16.9µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | 10.4µm/m·Ksourcemean 25-100 °C, ASTM E228, AFTER atmospheric heat treatment (as-built value not published) |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 84.5µm growth | 52µm growth1.63x less |
| Specific heat | 385J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 460J/kg·Ksourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition A, 0-100 °C (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 114mm²/s22.8x faster | 5mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 8,992W/m1.64x more resistant | 5,474W/m |
| Melting point | 1,065–1,083°Csourcesolidus-liquidus | not sourced |
| Values for | C11000 ETP copper, annealed to 0.050 mm grain size (OS050), 1 in. rod, copper.org typical values | EOS StainlessSteel 17-4PH IndustryLine (powder 9011-0041), EOS M 290, 40 µm, default job 17-4PH_040_StainlessM291_100, as built, horizontal; ISO 6892 & ASTM E8M |
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 17-4PH Stainless Steel is 3D printed: its properties depend on build direction and print settings; these are typical values.
Questions
Is Copper C110 stronger than DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is stronger: its yield strength is 861 MPa against 69 MPa for Copper C110 (12.5x).
Which is lighter, Copper C110 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is lighter: 7,790 kg/m³ against 8,913 kg/m³ for Copper C110.
Which is stiffer, Copper C110 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is stiffer: Young's modulus 197 GPa against 117 GPa for Copper C110, so the same part in DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Copper C110 or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
For the same stiffness or strength: DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel 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 | DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 14.3x heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | 6.15x heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | 4.04x 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 DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
Copper C110 conducts heat better: 391 W/m·K against 17.9 W/m·K for DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel.
Which expands less with temperature?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel expands less: 10.4 µm/m·K against 16.9 µm/m·K for Copper C110.