Materials / Compare
Stainless 316 vs. Zinc Zamak 3
Compare Stainless 316 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 | 265MPasourcetypical (representative), annealed 1.0 mm sheet | 221MPasourcetypical |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 583MPasourcetypical (representative), annealed 1.0 mm sheet | 283MPasourcetypical |
| Elongation at break | 61%sourcetypical (representative), annealed, in 2 in. (51 mm) | 10%sourcetypical, in 2 in. |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 200GPasourcetypical, in tension | 85.5GPasourcetypical |
| Density | 8,027kg/m³sourcetypical | 6,600kg/m³sourcetypical22% lighter |
| Strength to weight | 33kN·m/kg | 33.5kN·m/kg1% higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 24.9MN·m/kg1.92x higher | 13MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.3sourcedesign value (structural stainless steels) | 0.27sourcetypical, Zamak 3 hot-chamber die cast |
| Shear modulus | 76.9GPa2.29x stiffer in shear | 33.7GPa |
| Bulk modulus | 167GPa | 62GPa |
| Speed of sound | 4,992m/s | 3,599m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 14.6W/m·Ksource20–100 °C | 113W/m·Ksourcetypical |
| Thermal expansion | 16.5µm/m·Ksourcemean, 20–100 °C | 27.4µm/m·Ksourcetypical |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 82.5µm growth1.66x less | 137µm growth |
| Specific heat | 450J/kg·Ksourceat 20 °C | 419J/kg·Ksourcetypical |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 4.04mm²/s | 40.9mm²/s10.1x faster |
| Thermal shock resistance | 821W/m | 7,782W/m9.48x more resistant |
| Melting point | 1,390–1,440°Csourcemelting range | 381–387°Csourcemelting range |
| Max service temperature | 871–899°Csourceoxidation (scaling) limit in air | not sourced |
| Values for | ATI 316 (UNS S31600), annealed 1.0 mm sheet, ATI technical data sheet (2012); Poisson's ratio from the Nickel Institute/SCI structural stainless design manual | 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 Stainless 316 stronger than Zinc Zamak 3?
Stainless 316 is stronger: its yield strength is 265 MPa against 221 MPa for Zinc Zamak 3 (20%).
Which is lighter, Stainless 316 or Zinc Zamak 3?
Zinc Zamak 3 is lighter: 6,600 kg/m³ against 8,027 kg/m³ for Stainless 316.
Which is stiffer, Stainless 316 or Zinc Zamak 3?
Stainless 316 is stiffer: Young's modulus 200 GPa against 85.5 GPa for Zinc Zamak 3, so the same part in Stainless 316 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Stainless 316 or Zinc Zamak 3?
For the same stiffness or strength: Stainless 316 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension), stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate; Zinc Zamak 3 is lighter for a strong rod or tie, strong beam, strong panel or plate.
| Part that must be | Stainless 316 | Zinc Zamak 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 1.92x heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 26% heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 9% heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | 1% heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | 8% heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | 11% 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, Stainless 316 or Zinc Zamak 3?
Zinc Zamak 3 conducts heat better: 113 W/m·K against 14.6 W/m·K for Stainless 316.
Which expands less with temperature?
Stainless 316 expands less: 16.5 µm/m·K against 27.4 µm/m·K for Zinc Zamak 3.