FabDigitFabDigit

CLT vs LVL

Natural Material · grade comparison

CLT and LVL are both natural material grades. LVL is the stronger of the two: tensile strength 42 MPa (6.09 ksi) against 16 MPa (2.32 ksi) for CLT, about 163% more. In exchange, CLT is the more ductile: elongation 0.9% versus 0.8% for LVL. CLT is lighter (0.47 g/cm³ vs 0.55 g/cm³ for LVL) and LVL is stiffer (13.8 GPa vs 11 GPa). On the shop floor, LVL sits in a lower cost tier (budget, $) than CLT (standard, $$).

CLTChoose it when the part is bent, formed or impact-loaded, or when weight is the constraint.

LVLChoose it when strength drives the design, or when cost is the deciding factor.

CLT vs LVL: properties

CLTLVL

Mechanical

Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.

Elastic (Young's) Modulus

11 GPa1.6 Msi
13.8 GPa2 Msi

Shear Modulus

0.69 GPa0.1 Msi
0.86 GPa0.12 Msi

Poisson's Ratio

0.3
0.35

Tensile Strength (Ultimate)

16 MPa2.3 ksi
42 MPa6.1 ksi

Elongation at Break

0.9%
0.8%

Compressive Strength

21 MPa3 ksi
45 MPa6.5 ksi

Flexural Strength

24 MPa3.5 ksi
60 MPa8.7 ksi

Shear Strength

4 MPa0.51 ksi
7 MPa0.94 ksi

Fracture Toughness (K_IC)

0.4 MPa·√m0.36 ksi·√in
0.5 MPa·√m0.46 ksi·√in

Physical

Density and transition temperatures.

Density

0.47 g/cm³0.02 lb/in³
0.55 g/cm³0.02 lb/in³

Porosity

65%
62%

Thermal

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

Thermal Conductivity

0.12 W/m·K0.07 BTU/hr·ft·°F
0.13 W/m·K0.08 BTU/hr·ft·°F

Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)

4.5 µm/m·K2.5 µin/in·°F
4 µm/m·K2.2 µin/in·°F

Max Service Temperature (continuous)

55°C131 °F
50°C122 °F

Same in both: Specific Heat Capacity 1,600 J/kg·K0.38 BTU/lb·°F · Min Service Temperature -50°C-58 °F

Electrical

Conductivity and insulation.

Electrical Resistivity

1×10⁸ Ω·m3.94×10¹⁵ µΩ·in
1×10¹⁰ Ω·m3.94×10¹⁷ µΩ·in

Same in both: Dielectric Strength 4 kV/mm102 V/mil

Chemical & Environmental

Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).

Corrosion Resistance

45 / 100
35 / 100

Manufacturability

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

Machinability

92 / 100
85 / 100

Same in both: Polishability 35 / 100

Sustainability

Primary-production footprint per kilogram.

Embodied Energy (primary production)

9 MJ/kg3,869 BTU/lb
11 MJ/kg4,729 BTU/lb

Embodied Carbon (primary production)

0.42 kg CO₂/kg
0.45 kg CO₂/kg

Typical Recycled Content

2%
5%

Embodied Water

—
700 L/kg83.9 gal/lb

Common Calculations

Ratios derived from the values above.

Specific Strength (UTS / density)

34 kN·m/kg
76 kN·m/kg

Specific Stiffness (E / density)

23.4 MN·m/kg
25.1 MN·m/kg

Thermal Diffusivity

0.2 mm²/s
0.1 mm²/s

Same in both: Thermal Shock Resistance Index 0

Strength versus weight

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

Manufacturing and finishing

CapabilityCLTLVL
Default condition——
Relative cost$$ Standard$ Budget
Min. machined wall——
Best machined surface——

CLT vs LVL — frequently asked

Is LVL stronger than CLT?

Yes. LVL has a typical tensile strength of 42 MPa (6.09 ksi) against 16 MPa (2.32 ksi) for CLT — about 163% more.

Which is cheaper, CLT or LVL?

LVL is the lower-cost material: it sits in the budget tier ($) while CLT is standard ($$). 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, CLT or LVL?

CLT, by a small margin. Both rate excellent for machinability — 92/100 against 85/100 for LVL.

Ready to make it?

Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in CLT and LVL 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.