FabDigitFabDigit

Copper Alloy C83400 vs CC762S

Copper Alloy · grade comparison

Copper Alloy C83400 and CC762S are both copper alloy grades. CC762S is the stronger of the two: yield strength 470 MPa (68.2 ksi) against 69 MPa (10 ksi) for C83400, about 6.8 times as much; tensile strength follows at 780 MPa (113 ksi) vs 234 MPa (33.9 ksi). In exchange, C83400 is the more ductile: elongation 35% versus 12% for CC762S, and CC762S is harder (200 HB vs 50 HB). CC762S is lighter (7.7 g/cm³ vs 8.8 g/cm³ for C83400) and C83400 conducts heat better (159 W/m·K vs 36 W/m·K). On the shop floor, C83400 machines more easily (good vs poor) and C83400 welds better (fair vs poor).

C83400Choose it when the part is bent, formed or impact-loaded, or when the part is machined in volume.

CC762SChoose it when strength drives the design, or when weight is the constraint.

C83400 vs CC762S: properties

C83400CC762S

Mechanical

Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.

Elastic (Young's) Modulus

96.5 GPa14 Msi
100 GPa14.5 Msi

Shear Modulus

37 GPa5.4 Msi
38 GPa5.5 Msi

Bulk Modulus

105 GPa15.2 Msi
100 GPa14.5 Msi

Poisson's Ratio

0.34
0.33

Tensile Strength (Ultimate)

234 MPa33.9 ksi
780 MPa113 ksi

Yield Strength (0.2% offset)

69 MPa10 ksi
470 MPa68.2 ksi

Elongation at Break

35%
12%

Reduction in Area

30%
15%

Shear Strength

165 MPa23.9 ksi
470 MPa68.2 ksi

Fatigue Strength (Endurance Limit)

70 MPa10.2 ksi
200 MPa29 ksi

Charpy V-Notch Impact (RT)

40 J29.5 ft·lbf
14 J10.3 ft·lbf

Hardness, Brinell

50 HB
200 HB

Hardness, Vickers

53 HV
210 HV

Compressive Strength

—
490 MPa71.1 ksi

Hardness, Rockwell B

—
92 HRB

Physical

Density and transition temperatures.

Density

8.8 g/cm³0.32 lb/in³
7.7 g/cm³0.28 lb/in³

Melting Point (Solidus)

1,010°C1,850 °F
870°C1,598 °F

Liquidus Temperature

1,055°C1,931 °F
920°C1,688 °F

Thermal

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

Thermal Conductivity

159 W/m·K91.9 BTU/hr·ft·°F
36 W/m·K20.8 BTU/hr·ft·°F

Specific Heat Capacity

376 J/kg·K0.09 BTU/lb·°F
377 J/kg·K0.09 BTU/lb·°F

Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)

18.4 µm/m·K10.2 µin/in·°F
20.5 µm/m·K11.4 µin/in·°F

Latent Heat of Fusion

205 J/g88.1 BTU/lb
175 J/g75.2 BTU/lb

Min Service Temperature

-200°C-328 °F
-100°C-148 °F

Same in both: Max Service Temperature (continuous) 200°C392 °F

Electrical

Conductivity and insulation.

Electrical Conductivity

32 % IACS
8 % IACS

Electrical Resistivity

5.39×10⁻⁸ Ω·m2.12 µΩ·in
2.15×10⁻⁷ Ω·m8.46 µΩ·in

Chemical & Environmental

Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).

Galvanic Potential (seawater, vs SCE)

-0.25 V
-0.28 V

Corrosion Resistance

62 / 100
52 / 100

Manufacturability

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

Machinability

58 / 100
26 / 100

Machinability Rating (AISI 1212 = 100 %)

65%
30%

Weldability

45 / 100
28 / 100

Formability (cold)

30 / 100
12 / 100

Brazeability / Solderability

88 / 100
25 / 100

Polishability

70 / 100
60 / 100

Same in both: Castability 72 / 100

Sustainability

Primary-production footprint per kilogram.

Embodied Energy (primary production)

58 MJ/kg24,936 BTU/lb
55 MJ/kg23,646 BTU/lb

Embodied Water

260 L/kg31.2 gal/lb
300 L/kg35.9 gal/lb

Typical Recycled Content

80%
75%

Same in both: Embodied Carbon (primary production) 3.6 kg CO₂/kg

Common Calculations

Ratios derived from the values above.

Specific Strength (UTS / density)

27 kN·m/kg
101 kN·m/kg

Specific Stiffness (E / density)

11 MN·m/kg
13 MN·m/kg

Modulus of Resilience

25 kJ/m³
1,105 kJ/m³

Thermal Diffusivity

48.1 mm²/s
12.4 mm²/s

Thermal Shock Resistance Index

21
14

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 scaleC83400CC762S

Manufacturing and finishing

CapabilityC83400CC762S
CNC machiningYes—
Default conditionAs Cast—
Relative cost$$$$ High$$$$ High
Min. machined wall0.8 mm—
Best machined surfaceRa 1.6 µm—
Chrome PlatingYes—
ElectropolishingYes—
Nickel PlatingYes—
PaintingYes—
Tin PlatingYes—

They share 4 finishes: Copper Plating, Electroless Nickel (EN), Gold Plating, Silver Plating.

C83400 vs CC762S — frequently asked

Is CC762S stronger than C83400?

Yes. CC762S has a typical yield strength of 470 MPa (68.2 ksi) against 69 MPa (10 ksi) for C83400 — about 6.8 times as much. Tensile strength is 780 MPa (113 ksi) vs 234 MPa (33.9 ksi).

Which is cheaper, C83400 or CC762S?

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, C83400 or CC762S?

C83400. Its machinability rates good (58/100) against poor (26/100) for CC762S; for welding the order is C83400 first (fair, 45/100) then CC762S (poor, 28/100).

Ready to make it?

Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in C83400 and CC762S 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.