FabDigitFabDigit

COC vs PMMA

Polymer · grade comparison

COC and PMMA are both polymer grades. PMMA is the stronger of the two: yield strength 68 MPa (9.86 ksi) against 60 MPa (8.7 ksi) for COC, about 13% more; tensile strength follows at 70 MPa (10.2 ksi) vs 63 MPa (9.14 ksi). In exchange, COC is the more ductile: elongation 5% versus 4.5% for PMMA. COC is lighter (1.02 g/cm³ vs 1.19 g/cm³ for PMMA) and COC runs hotter in service (110°C vs 70°C continuous). On the shop floor, PMMA machines more easily (very good vs good) and PMMA sits in a lower cost tier (budget, $) than COC (high, $$$$).

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

PMMAChoose it when strength drives the design, or when the part is machined in volume.

COC vs PMMA: properties

COCPMMA

Mechanical

Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.

Elastic (Young's) Modulus

3.1 GPa0.45 Msi
3.2 GPa0.46 Msi

Poisson's Ratio

0.4
0.37

Tensile Strength (Ultimate)

63 MPa9.1 ksi
70 MPa10.2 ksi

Yield Strength (0.2% offset)

60 MPa8.7 ksi
68 MPa9.9 ksi

Elongation at Break

5%
4.5%

Flexural Strength

95 MPa13.8 ksi
100 MPa14.5 ksi

Flexural Modulus

2.9 GPa0.42 Msi
3.1 GPa0.45 Msi

Izod Impact, Notched

21 J/m0.39 ft·lbf/in
18 J/m0.34 ft·lbf/in

Hardness, Rockwell M

89 HRM
92 HRM

Shear Modulus

—
1.2 GPa0.17 Msi

Bulk Modulus

—
6 GPa0.81 Msi

Compressive Strength

—
110 MPa16 ksi

Compressive Modulus

—
3.1 GPa0.45 Msi

Shear Strength

—
60 MPa8.7 ksi

Fracture Toughness (K_IC)

—
1.2 MPa·√m1.1 ksi·√in

Hardness, Shore D

—
89 Shore D

Physical

Density and transition temperatures.

Density

1.02 g/cm³0.04 lb/in³
1.19 g/cm³0.04 lb/in³

Glass Transition (Tg)

138°C280 °F
105°C221 °F

Water Absorption (24 h)

0.01%
0.3%

Water Absorption (Saturation)

0.01%
2%

Refractive Index

1.53
1.491

Light Transmission

91%
92%

Thermal

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

Thermal Conductivity

0.15 W/m·K0.09 BTU/hr·ft·°F
0.19 W/m·K0.11 BTU/hr·ft·°F

Specific Heat Capacity

1,500 J/kg·K0.36 BTU/lb·°F
1,470 J/kg·K0.35 BTU/lb·°F

Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)

65 µm/m·K36.1 µin/in·°F
70 µm/m·K38.9 µin/in·°F

Max Service Temperature (continuous)

110°C230 °F
70°C158 °F

Min Service Temperature

-50°C-58 °F
-40°C-40 °F

Heat Deflection Temp. @ 0.45 MPa

130°C266 °F
96°C205 °F

Heat Deflection Temp. @ 1.8 MPa

123°C253 °F
88°C190 °F

Vicat Softening Point (B50)

130°C266 °F
105°C221 °F

Limiting Oxygen Index

19%
18%

Max Service Temperature (short-term)

130°C266 °F
95°C203 °F

Electrical

Conductivity and insulation.

Electrical Resistivity

1×10¹⁴ Ω·m3.94×10²¹ µΩ·in
1×10¹³ Ω·m3.94×10²⁰ µΩ·in

Dielectric Strength

45 kV/mm1,143 V/mil
25 kV/mm635 V/mil

Dielectric Constant (1 MHz)

2.35
2.7

Dissipation Factor (1 MHz)

2×10⁻⁴
0.02

Volume Resistivity

1×10¹⁶ Ω·cm
1×10¹⁵ Ω·cm

Surface Resistivity

1×10¹⁶ Ω
1×10¹⁵ Ω

Same in both: Comparative Tracking Index (CTI) 600 V

Chemical & Environmental

Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).

Corrosion Resistance

88 / 100
80 / 100

UV / Weathering Resistance

30 / 100
92 / 100

Manufacturability

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

Machinability

60 / 100
70 / 100

Weldability

50 / 100
55 / 100

Formability (cold)

55 / 100
45 / 100

Polishability

85 / 100
96 / 100

Mold Shrinkage

0.6%
0.5%

Melt Flow Rate

12 g/10 min
2 g/10 min

Processing Melt Temperature (typ.)

270°C518 °F
240°C464 °F

Mold Temperature (typ.)

110°C230 °F
70°C158 °F

Sustainability

Primary-production footprint per kilogram.

Embodied Energy (primary production)

110 MJ/kg47,292 BTU/lb
101 MJ/kg43,422 BTU/lb

Embodied Carbon (primary production)

4.5 kg CO₂/kg
6.4 kg CO₂/kg

Typical Recycled Content

0%
2%

Embodied Water

—
280 L/kg33.6 gal/lb

Common Calculations

Ratios derived from the values above.

Specific Strength (UTS / density)

62 kN·m/kg
59 kN·m/kg

Specific Stiffness (E / density)

3 MN·m/kg
2.7 MN·m/kg

Modulus of Resilience

581 kJ/m³
723 kJ/m³

Same in both: Thermal Diffusivity 0.1 mm²/s · Thermal Shock Resistance Index 0

Strength versus weight

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

0.1110100123Density (g/cm³)Yield strength (MPa) — log scalePMMACOC

Manufacturing and finishing

CapabilityCOCPMMA
CNC machining—Yes
Sheet metal—Yes
Injection molding—Yes
Default condition—Extruded
Relative cost$$$$ High$ Budget
Min. machined wall—0.5 mm
Best machined surface—Ra 0.8 µm
Chrome Plating (Plastic)—Yes
EMI Shielding Coating—Yes
Painting—Yes
Soft Touch Coating—Yes
Spray Painting—Yes
UV Coating—Yes

COC vs PMMA — frequently asked

Is PMMA stronger than COC?

Yes. PMMA has a typical yield strength of 68 MPa (9.86 ksi) against 60 MPa (8.7 ksi) for COC — about 13% more. Tensile strength is 70 MPa (10.2 ksi) vs 63 MPa (9.14 ksi).

Which is cheaper, COC or PMMA?

PMMA is the lower-cost material: it sits in the budget tier ($) while COC is high ($$$$). 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, COC or PMMA?

PMMA. Its machinability rates very good (70/100) against good (60/100) for COC; for welding the order is PMMA first (good, 55/100) then COC (fair, 50/100).

Ready to make it?

Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in COC and PMMA 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.