Grade 29 Titanium vs. ISO-WD43150 Magnesium
Grade 29 titanium belongs to the titanium alloys classification, while ISO-WD43150 magnesium belongs to the magnesium 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 grade 29 titanium and the bottom bar is ISO-WD43150 magnesium.
Metric UnitsUS Customary Units
Mechanical Properties
| Elastic (Young's, Tensile) Modulus, GPa | 110 | |
| 45 |
| Elongation at Break, % | 6.8 to 11 | |
| 2.8 |
| Fatigue Strength, MPa | 460 to 510 | |
| 100 |
| Poisson's Ratio | 0.32 | |
| 0.29 |
| Shear Modulus, GPa | 40 | |
| 18 |
| Shear Strength, MPa | 550 to 560 | |
| 140 |
| Tensile Strength: Ultimate (UTS), MPa | 930 to 940 | |
| 250 |
| Tensile Strength: Yield (Proof), MPa | 850 to 870 | |
| 150 |
Thermal Properties
| Latent Heat of Fusion, J/g | 410 | |
| 350 |
| Maximum Temperature: Mechanical, °C | 340 | |
| 95 |
| Melting Completion (Liquidus), °C | 1610 | |
| 610 |
| Melting Onset (Solidus), °C | 1560 | |
| 590 |
| Specific Heat Capacity, J/kg-K | 560 | |
| 990 |
| Thermal Conductivity, W/m-K | 7.3 | |
| 140 |
| Thermal Expansion, µm/m-K | 9.3 | |
| 27 |
Electrical Properties
| Electrical Conductivity: Equal Volume, % IACS | 1.0 | |
| 31 |
| Electrical Conductivity: Equal Weight (Specific), % IACS | 2.0 | |
| 170 |
Otherwise Unclassified Properties
| Base Metal Price, % relative | 36 | |
| 12 |
| Density, g/cm3 | 4.5 | |
| 1.7 |
| Embodied Carbon, kg CO2/kg material | 39 | |
| 24 |
| Embodied Energy, MJ/kg | 640 | |
| 160 |
| Embodied Water, L/kg | 410 | |
| 970 |
Common Calculations
| Resilience: Ultimate (Unit Rupture Work), MJ/m3 | 62 to 100 | |
| 6.1 |
| Resilience: Unit (Modulus of Resilience), kJ/m3 | 3420 to 3540 | |
| 250 |
| Stiffness to Weight: Axial, points | 13 | |
| 15 |
| Stiffness to Weight: Bending, points | 35 | |
| 71 |
| Strength to Weight: Axial, points | 58 to 59 | |
| 41 |
| Strength to Weight: Bending, points | 47 to 48 | |
| 52 |
| Thermal Diffusivity, mm2/s | 2.9 | |
| 81 |
| Thermal Shock Resistance, points | 68 to 69 | |
| 14 |
Alloy Composition
| Aluminum (Al), % | 5.5 to 6.5 | |
| 0 |
| Carbon (C), % | 0 to 0.080 | |
| 0 |
| Copper (Cu), % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.050 |
| Hydrogen (H), % | 0 to 0.015 | |
| 0 |
| Iron (Fe), % | 0 to 0.25 | |
| 0 |
| Magnesium (Mg), % | 0 | |
| 97.5 to 98.8 |
| Manganese (Mn), % | 0 | |
| 1.2 to 2.0 |
| Nickel (Ni), % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.010 |
| Nitrogen (N), % | 0 to 0.030 | |
| 0 |
| Oxygen (O), % | 0 to 0.13 | |
| 0 |
| Ruthenium (Ru), % | 0.080 to 0.14 | |
| 0 |
| Silicon (Si), % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.1 |
| Titanium (Ti), % | 88 to 90.9 | |
| 0 |
| Vanadium (V), % | 3.5 to 4.5 | |
| 0 |
| Residuals, % | 0 | |
| 0 to 0.3 |