FabDigitFabDigit

Copper Alloy C16200 vs TU2

Copper Alloy · grade comparison

Copper Alloy C16200 and TU2 are both copper alloy grades. C16200 is the stronger of the two: yield strength 395 MPa (57.3 ksi) against 70 MPa (10.2 ksi) for TU2, about 5.6 times as much; tensile strength follows at 435 MPa (63.1 ksi) vs 230 MPa (33.4 ksi). In exchange, TU2 is the more ductile: elongation 45% versus 8% for C16200, and C16200 is harder (115 HB vs 42 HB). TU2 runs hotter in service (250°C vs 200°C continuous) and TU2 conducts heat better (391 W/m·K vs 350 W/m·K). On the shop floor, TU2 welds better (very good vs fair).

C16200Choose it when strength drives the design.

TU2Choose it when the part is bent, formed or impact-loaded, or when the part sees heat.

C16200 vs TU2: properties

C16200TU2

Mechanical

Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.

Elastic (Young's) Modulus

117 GPa17 Msi
115 GPa16.7 Msi

Shear Modulus

44 GPa6.4 Msi
45 GPa6.5 Msi

Tensile Strength (Ultimate)

435 MPa63.1 ksi
230 MPa33.4 ksi

Yield Strength (0.2% offset)

395 MPa57.3 ksi
70 MPa10.2 ksi

Elongation at Break

8%
45%

Shear Strength

265 MPa38.4 ksi
150 MPa21.8 ksi

Fatigue Strength (Endurance Limit)

170 MPa24.7 ksi
75 MPa10.9 ksi

Hardness, Brinell

115 HB
42 HB

Hardness, Rockwell B

65 HRB
—

Hardness, Vickers

120 HV
45 HV

Reduction in Area

—
75%

Same in both: Bulk Modulus 140 GPa20.3 Msi · Poisson's Ratio 0.34

Physical

Density and transition temperatures.

Melting Point (Solidus)

1,030°C1,886 °F
1,083°C1,981 °F

Liquidus Temperature

1,076°C1,969 °F
1,083°C1,981 °F

Same in both: Density 8.94 g/cm³0.32 lb/in³

Thermal

How each material carries heat and how hot it can run.

Thermal Conductivity

350 W/m·K202 BTU/hr·ft·°F
391 W/m·K226 BTU/hr·ft·°F

Max Service Temperature (continuous)

200°C392 °F
250°C482 °F

Min Service Temperature

-200°C-328 °F
-269°C-452 °F

Same in both: Specific Heat Capacity 385 J/kg·K0.09 BTU/lb·°F · Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C) 17 µm/m·K9.4 µin/in·°F · Latent Heat of Fusion 205 J/g88.1 BTU/lb

Electrical

Conductivity and insulation.

Electrical Conductivity

87 % IACS
101 % IACS

Electrical Resistivity

1.98×10⁻⁸ Ω·m0.78 µΩ·in
1.71×10⁻⁸ Ω·m0.673 µΩ·in

Chemical & Environmental

Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).

Corrosion Resistance

70 / 100
60 / 100

Same in both: Galvanic Potential (seawater, vs SCE) -0.25 V

Manufacturability

FabDigit workshop ratings (0–100 scores) — how each material behaves on the machine.

Machinability

25 / 100
20 / 100

Weldability

40 / 100
70 / 100

Formability (cold)

40 / 100
95 / 100

Brazeability / Solderability

85 / 100
98 / 100

Polishability

70 / 100
85 / 100

Same in both: Machinability Rating (AISI 1212 = 100 %) 20%

Sustainability

Primary-production footprint per kilogram.

Typical Recycled Content

30%
10%

Same in both: Embodied Energy (primary production) 57 MJ/kg24,506 BTU/lb · Embodied Carbon (primary production) 3.8 kg CO₂/kg · Embodied Water 250 L/kg30 gal/lb

Common Calculations

Ratios derived from the values above.

Specific Strength (UTS / density)

49 kN·m/kg
26 kN·m/kg

Specific Stiffness (E / density)

13.1 MN·m/kg
12.9 MN·m/kg

Modulus of Resilience

667 kJ/m³
21 kJ/m³

Thermal Diffusivity

101.7 mm²/s
113.6 mm²/s

Thermal Shock Resistance Index

77
46

Strength versus weight

Yield strength against density for every copper alloy grade in the FabDigit library; the compared grades are highlighted. Up and left is stronger for its weight.

501002005001,0007.588.599.5Density (g/cm³)Yield strength (MPa) — log scaleC16200TU2

Manufacturing and finishing

CapabilityC16200TU2
Default condition——
Relative cost$$$$ High$$$$ High
Min. machined wall——
Best machined surface——

Both take the same 4 finishes: Copper Plating, Electroless Nickel (EN), Gold Plating, Silver Plating.

C16200 vs TU2 — frequently asked

Is C16200 stronger than TU2?

Yes. C16200 has a typical yield strength of 395 MPa (57.3 ksi) against 70 MPa (10.2 ksi) for TU2 — about 5.6 times as much. Tensile strength is 435 MPa (63.1 ksi) vs 230 MPa (33.4 ksi).

Which is cheaper, C16200 or TU2?

Both sit in the same relative cost tier ($$$$, high); the part price will be decided by machining time, tolerance and quantity rather than by the material.

Which is easier to machine, C16200 or TU2?

C16200, by a small margin. Both rate poor for machinability — 25/100 against 20/100 for TU2; for welding the order is TU2 first (very good, 70/100) then C16200 (fair, 40/100).

Ready to make it?

Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in C16200 and TU2 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.