Materials / Compare
Copper C110 vs. Zinc Zamak 3
Compare Copper C110 vs. Zinc Zamak 3 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 | 221MPasourcetypical |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 221MPasourcetypical | 283MPasourcetypical28% stronger |
| Elongation at break | 55%sourcetypical, 1 in. rod | 10%sourcetypical, in 2 in. |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 117GPasourcetypical37% stiffer | 85.5GPasourcetypical |
| Density | 8,913kg/m³sourcenominal | 6,600kg/m³sourcetypical |
| Strength to weight | 7.74kN·m/kg | 33.5kN·m/kg4.33x higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 13.1MN·m/kg2% higher | 13MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.34sourcereference value at room temperature (Wieland-K32 = Cu-ETP = C11000, rolled products) | 0.27sourcetypical, Zamak 3 hot-chamber die cast |
| Shear modulus | 43.7GPa30% stiffer in shear | 33.7GPa |
| Bulk modulus | 122GPa | 62GPa |
| Speed of sound | 3,626m/s | 3,599m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 391W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 113W/m·Ksourcetypical |
| Thermal expansion | 16.9µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | 27.4µm/m·Ksourcetypical |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 84.5µm growth1.62x less | 137µm growth |
| Specific heat | 385J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | 419J/kg·Ksourcetypical |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 114mm²/s2.79x faster | 40.9mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 8,992W/m16% more resistant | 7,782W/m |
| Melting point | 1,065–1,083°Csourcesolidus-liquidus | 381–387°Csourcemelting range |
| Values for | C11000 ETP copper, annealed to 0.050 mm grain size (OS050), 1 in. rod, copper.org typical values | Zamak 3 (ASTM B86 die cast), Nathan Trotter (zinc alloy producer) technical data sheet, typical values |
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 Zinc Zamak 3?
Zinc Zamak 3 is stronger: its yield strength is 221 MPa against 69 MPa for Copper C110 (3.2x).
Which is lighter, Copper C110 or Zinc Zamak 3?
Zinc Zamak 3 is lighter: 6,600 kg/m³ against 8,913 kg/m³ for Copper C110.
Which is stiffer, Copper C110 or Zinc Zamak 3?
Copper C110 is stiffer: Young's modulus 117 GPa against 85.5 GPa for Zinc Zamak 3, so the same part in Copper C110 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Copper C110 or Zinc Zamak 3?
For the same stiffness or strength: Copper C110 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension); Zinc Zamak 3 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 | Zinc Zamak 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 2% heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | 15% heavier | lighter |
| Stiff panel or plate | 22% heavier | lighter |
| Strong rod or tie | 4.33x heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | 2.93x heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | 2.42x 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 Zinc Zamak 3?
Copper C110 conducts heat better: 391 W/m·K against 113 W/m·K for Zinc Zamak 3.
Which expands less with temperature?
Copper C110 expands less: 16.9 µm/m·K against 27.4 µm/m·K for Zinc Zamak 3.