ASTM A369 Grade FP9 vs. 358.0 Aluminum
ASTM A369 grade FP9 belongs to the iron alloys classification, while 358.0 aluminum belongs to the aluminum alloys. There are 30 material properties with values for both materials. Properties with values for just one material (2, in this case) are not shown. Please note that the two materials have significantly dissimilar densities. This means that additional care is required when interpreting the data, because some material properties are based on units of mass, while others are based on units of area or volume.
For each property being compared, the top bar is ASTM A369 grade FP9 and the bottom bar is 358.0 aluminum.
Metric UnitsUS Customary Units
Mechanical Properties
| Elastic (Young's, Tensile) Modulus, GPa | 190 | |
| 71 |
| Elongation at Break, % | 20 | |
| 3.5 to 6.0 |
| Fatigue Strength, MPa | 160 | |
| 100 to 110 |
| Poisson's Ratio | 0.28 | |
| 0.33 |
| Shear Modulus, GPa | 75 | |
| 27 |
| Shear Strength, MPa | 300 | |
| 300 to 320 |
| Tensile Strength: Ultimate (UTS), MPa | 470 | |
| 350 to 370 |
| Tensile Strength: Yield (Proof), MPa | 240 | |
| 290 to 320 |
Thermal Properties
| Latent Heat of Fusion, J/g | 270 | |
| 520 |
| Maximum Temperature: Mechanical, °C | 600 | |
| 170 |
| Melting Completion (Liquidus), °C | 1450 | |
| 600 |
| Melting Onset (Solidus), °C | 1410 | |
| 560 |
| Specific Heat Capacity, J/kg-K | 480 | |
| 900 |
| Thermal Conductivity, W/m-K | 26 | |
| 150 |
| Thermal Expansion, µm/m-K | 13 | |
| 21 |
Electrical Properties
| Electrical Conductivity: Equal Volume, % IACS | 9.0 | |
| 36 |
| Electrical Conductivity: Equal Weight (Specific), % IACS | 10 | |
| 130 |
Otherwise Unclassified Properties
| Base Metal Price, % relative | 6.5 | |
| 19 |
| Density, g/cm3 | 7.8 | |
| 2.6 |
| Embodied Carbon, kg CO2/kg material | 2.0 | |
| 8.7 |
| Embodied Energy, MJ/kg | 28 | |
| 160 |
| Embodied Water, L/kg | 87 | |
| 1090 |
Common Calculations
| Resilience: Ultimate (Unit Rupture Work), MJ/m3 | 80 | |
| 12 to 20 |
| Resilience: Unit (Modulus of Resilience), kJ/m3 | 140 | |
| 590 to 710 |
| Stiffness to Weight: Axial, points | 14 | |
| 15 |
| Stiffness to Weight: Bending, points | 25 | |
| 53 |
| Strength to Weight: Axial, points | 17 | |
| 37 to 39 |
| Strength to Weight: Bending, points | 17 | |
| 42 to 44 |
| Thermal Diffusivity, mm2/s | 6.9 | |
| 63 |
| Thermal Shock Resistance, points | 13 | |
| 16 to 17 |
Alloy Composition
Deprecated: Automatic conversion of false to array is deprecated in /home/public/compare.php on line 460
| Aluminum (Al), % | 0 | |
| 89.1 to 91.8 |
| Beryllium (Be), % | 0 | |
| 0.1 to 0.3 |
| Carbon (C), % | 0 to 0.15 | |
| 0 |
| Chromium (Cr), % | 8.0 to 10 | |
| 0 to 0.2 |
| Copper (Cu), % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.2 |
| Iron (Fe), % | 87.1 to 90.3 | |
| 0 to 0.3 |
| Magnesium (Mg), % | 0 | |
| 0.4 to 0.6 |
| Manganese (Mn), % | 0.3 to 0.6 | |
| 0 to 0.2 |
| Molybdenum (Mo), % | 0.9 to 1.1 | |
| 0 |
| Phosphorus (P), % | 0 to 0.030 | |
| 0 |
| Silicon (Si), % | 0.5 to 1.0 | |
| 7.6 to 8.6 |
| Sulfur (S), % | 0 to 0.030 | |
| 0 |
| Titanium (Ti), % | 0 | |
| 0.1 to 0.2 |
| Zinc (Zn), % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.2 |
| Residuals, % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.15 |