ASTM A369 Grade FPA vs. 6005A Aluminum
ASTM A369 grade FPA belongs to the iron alloys classification, while 6005A aluminum belongs to the aluminum alloys. There are 30 material properties with values for both materials. Properties with values for just one material (1, 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 FPA and the bottom bar is 6005A aluminum.
Metric UnitsUS Customary Units
Mechanical Properties
| Elastic (Young's, Tensile) Modulus, GPa | 190 | |
| 69 |
| Elongation at Break, % | 27 | |
| 8.6 to 17 |
| Fatigue Strength, MPa | 180 | |
| 55 to 110 |
| Poisson's Ratio | 0.29 | |
| 0.33 |
| Shear Modulus, GPa | 73 | |
| 26 |
| Shear Strength, MPa | 240 | |
| 120 to 180 |
| Tensile Strength: Ultimate (UTS), MPa | 380 | |
| 190 to 300 |
| Tensile Strength: Yield (Proof), MPa | 240 | |
| 100 to 270 |
Thermal Properties
| Latent Heat of Fusion, J/g | 250 | |
| 410 |
| Maximum Temperature: Mechanical, °C | 400 | |
| 170 |
| Melting Completion (Liquidus), °C | 1460 | |
| 650 |
| Melting Onset (Solidus), °C | 1420 | |
| 600 |
| Specific Heat Capacity, J/kg-K | 470 | |
| 900 |
| Thermal Conductivity, W/m-K | 52 | |
| 180 to 190 |
| Thermal Expansion, µm/m-K | 12 | |
| 23 |
Electrical Properties
| Electrical Conductivity: Equal Volume, % IACS | 7.1 | |
| 47 to 50 |
| Electrical Conductivity: Equal Weight (Specific), % IACS | 8.1 | |
| 150 to 170 |
Otherwise Unclassified Properties
| Base Metal Price, % relative | 1.8 | |
| 9.5 |
| Density, g/cm3 | 7.8 | |
| 2.7 |
| Embodied Carbon, kg CO2/kg material | 1.4 | |
| 8.3 |
| Embodied Energy, MJ/kg | 18 | |
| 150 |
| Embodied Water, L/kg | 46 | |
| 1180 |
Common Calculations
| Resilience: Ultimate (Unit Rupture Work), MJ/m3 | 89 | |
| 24 to 29 |
| Resilience: Unit (Modulus of Resilience), kJ/m3 | 150 | |
| 76 to 530 |
| Stiffness to Weight: Axial, points | 13 | |
| 14 |
| Stiffness to Weight: Bending, points | 24 | |
| 50 |
| Strength to Weight: Axial, points | 13 | |
| 20 to 30 |
| Strength to Weight: Bending, points | 15 | |
| 27 to 36 |
| Thermal Diffusivity, mm2/s | 14 | |
| 72 to 79 |
| Thermal Shock Resistance, points | 12 | |
| 8.6 to 13 |
Alloy Composition
| Aluminum (Al), % | 0 | |
| 96.5 to 99.1 |
| Carbon (C), % | 0 to 0.25 | |
| 0 |
| Chromium (Cr), % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.3 |
| Copper (Cu), % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.3 |
| Iron (Fe), % | 98.3 to 99.63 | |
| 0 to 0.35 |
| Magnesium (Mg), % | 0 | |
| 0.4 to 0.7 |
| Manganese (Mn), % | 0.27 to 0.93 | |
| 0 to 0.5 |
| Phosphorus (P), % | 0 to 0.035 | |
| 0 |
| Silicon (Si), % | 0.1 to 0.5 | |
| 0.5 to 0.9 |
| Sulfur (S), % | 0 to 0.035 | |
| 0 |
| Titanium (Ti), % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.1 |
| Zinc (Zn), % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.2 |
| Residuals, % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.15 |