5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb vs Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core
Composite · grade comparison
5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb and Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core are both composite grades. 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb is the stronger of the two: tensile strength 3 MPa (0.406 ksi) against 0.22 MPa (0.0319 ksi) for Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core, about 13 times as much. Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core is lighter (0.03 g/cm³ vs 0.05 g/cm³ for 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb) and 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb is stiffer (0.52 GPa vs 0.01 GPa). On the shop floor, Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core machines more easily (excellent vs fair) and Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core sits in a lower cost tier (standard, $$) than 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb (premium, $$$).
5052-H39 Aluminum HoneycombChoose it when strength drives the design, or when the part sees heat.
Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam CoreChoose it when weight is the constraint, or when the part is machined in volume.
5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb vs Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core: propertiesHow to read these bars
- One bar per material. A full bar is the highest value among all composite grades in the FabDigit library; each bar is drawn as a share of that.
- The better value (by the usual engineering direction) is in bold. Rows with no direction — density, thermal conductivity — have no bold.
- Values are typical room-temperature figures for the condition named on each card.
- Confirm against the certified mill or resin datasheet before design release.
How to read these bars
- One bar per material. A full bar is the highest value among all composite grades in the FabDigit library; each bar is drawn as a share of that.
- The better value (by the usual engineering direction) is in bold. Rows with no direction — density, thermal conductivity — have no bold.
- Values are typical room-temperature figures for the condition named on each card.
- Confirm against the certified mill or resin datasheet before design release.
5052-H39 Aluminum HoneycombPolyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core
Mechanical
Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.
Elastic (Young's) Modulus
Shear Modulus
Poisson's Ratio
Tensile Strength (Ultimate)
Yield Strength (0.2% offset)
Compressive Strength
Compressive Modulus
Shear Strength
Flexural Strength
Physical
Density and transition temperatures.
Density
Water Absorption (24 h)
Water Absorption (Saturation)
Thermal
How each material carries heat and how hot it can run.
Thermal Conductivity
Specific Heat Capacity
Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)
Max Service Temperature (continuous)
Min Service Temperature
Max Service Temperature (short-term)
Limiting Oxygen Index
Electrical
Conductivity and insulation.
Electrical Resistivity
Dielectric Constant (1 MHz)
Chemical & Environmental
Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).
Corrosion Resistance
UV / Weathering Resistance
Manufacturability
FabDigit workshop ratings (0–100 scores) — how each material behaves on the machine.
Machinability
Polishability
Sustainability
Primary-production footprint per kilogram.
Embodied Energy (primary production)
Embodied Carbon (primary production)
Embodied Water
Typical Recycled Content
Common Calculations
Ratios derived from the values above.
Specific Strength (UTS / density)
Specific Stiffness (E / density)
Thermal Diffusivity
Thermal Shock Resistance Index
Strength versus weight
Yield strength against density for every composite grade in the FabDigit library; the compared grades are highlighted. Up and left is stronger for its weight.
Manufacturing and finishing
| Capability | 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb | Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core |
|---|---|---|
| Default condition | — | — |
| Relative cost | $$$ Premium | $$ Standard |
| Min. machined wall | — | — |
| Best machined surface | — | — |
5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb vs Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core — frequently asked
Is 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb stronger than Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core?
Yes. 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb has a typical tensile strength of 3 MPa (0.406 ksi) against 0.22 MPa (0.0319 ksi) for Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core — about 13 times as much.
Which is cheaper, 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb or Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core?
Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core is the lower-cost material: it sits in the standard tier ($$) while 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb is premium ($$$). Part price depends far more on geometry, tolerance and quantity than on raw stock — upload a CAD file for a live quote.
Which is easier to machine, 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb or Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core?
Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core. Its machinability rates excellent (93/100) against fair (38/100) for 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb.
Ready to make it?
Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in 5052-H39 Aluminum Honeycomb and Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Foam Core side by side — material, machining time, tolerance and finish in one quote. Certified material data ships with the order on request.
Typical handbook values for the conditions named above, normalised for comparison. Hardness on non-Brinell scales is converted approximately for charting only. Request certified data with your order for design-critical properties.