Relational

Analysis
Guidelines for Estimating the
High- and Low-Temperature
Properties of Metals

J. Gilbert Kaufman

ASM International
Materials Park, Ohio 44073-0002
www.asminternational.org
 Copyright 2011
by
ASM International
All rights reserved

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of the
copyright owner.

First printing, November 2011

Great care is taken in the compilation and production of this book, but it should be made clear that NO
WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ARE GIVEN IN CONNECTION
WITH THIS PUBLICATION. Although this information is believed to be accurate by ASM, ASM cannot
guarantee that favorable results will be obtained from the use of this publication alone. This publication is
intended for use by persons having technical skill, at their sole discretion and risk. Since the conditions of
product or material use are outside of ASMs control, ASM assumes no liability or obligation in connection with
any use of this information. No claim of any kind, whether as to products or information in this publication, and
whether or not based on negligence, shall be greater in amount than the purchase price of this product or
publication in respect of which damages are claimed. THE REMEDY HEREBY PROVIDED SHALL BE THE
EXCLUSIVE AND SOLE REMEDY OF BUYER, AND IN NO EVENT SHALL EITHER PARTY BE
LIABLE FOR SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHETHER OR NOT CAUSED
BY OR RESULTING FROM THE NEGLIGENCE OF SUCH PARTY. As with any material, evaluation of the
material under end-use conditions prior to specification is essential. Therefore, specific testing under actual
conditions is recommended.

Nothing contained in this book shall be construed as a grant of any right of manufacture, sale, use, or
reproduction, in connection with any method, process, apparatus, product, composition, or system, whether or
not covered by letters patent, copyright, or trademark, and nothing contained in this book shall be construed as a
defense against any alleged infringement of letters patent, copyright, or trademark, or as a defense against
liability for such infringement.

Comments, criticisms, and suggestions are invited, and should be forwarded to ASM International.

Prepared under the direction of the ASM International Technical Book Committee (20102011), Michael J.
Pfeifer, Chair.

ASM International staff who worked on this project include Scott Henry, Senior Manager, Content Development
and Publishing; Steven R. Lampman, Content Developer; Sue Sellers, Editorial Assistant; Bonnie Sanders,
Manager of Production; Madrid Tramble, Senior Production Coordinator; and Diane Whitelaw, Production
Coordinator.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2011937049

ISBN-13: 978-1-61503-824-4
ISBN-10: 1-61503-824-8
SAN: 204-7586

ASM International
Materials Park, OH 44073-0002
www.asminternational.org
Printed in the United States of America
Relational AnalysisGuidelines for Estimating the High- and Low-Temperature Properties of Metals Copyright 2011 ASM International
J.G. Kaufman All rights reserved.
www.asminternational.org

Contents

Preface and Acknowledgments...............................................................v 5.3 Analysis of Data for the Sand Cast 300.0 Alloy Series62
About the Author....................................................................................vi 5.4 Analysis of Data for the Permanent Mold Cast 300.0 Alloy
Series66
5.5 Analysis of Data for the Die Cast 300.0 Alloy Series69
Chapter 1Introduction and Background 1
5.6 Summary of Baseline Relationships for All 300.0 Casting
1.1Relational Analysis of Temperature Effects1
Alloys72
1.2 Interrelation of Relational Analysis and Parametric Analysis2
5.7 Cast Aluminum Alloys of the 400.0, 500.0, and 700.0
Series 76
Chapter 2Relational Analysis Procedures5 5.8 Baseline Relationships for Cast Aluminum Alloys77
2.1 Procedure for Relational Analysis of Tensile Properties 5.9 Analysis of Subzero Temperature Data for Cast Aluminum
with Temperature6 Alloys78
2.2 Other Examples of Relational Analysis6 5.10Analysis of Elastic Moduli of Cast Aluminum Alloys80
2.3 Cautions in Using Relational Analysis 10
Chapter 6Application of Relational Analysis to New or
Chapter 3Accuracy of Relational Analysis for Several Wrought Untested Wrought and Cast Aluminum Alloys81
Aluminum Alloys 15 6.1 Alloy 1060-H14 and -H18 (Table 6.1)81
3.1 Alloy Alc 2014-T6 and -T651 (Table 3.1)15 6.2 Alloy 1350-O and -H18 (Table 6.2)84
3.2 Alloy 2021-T81 (Table 3.2)19 6.3 Alclad 2024-T3 and -T81 (Table 6.3) 86
3.3 Alloy 5005-O (Table 3.3)22 6.4 Propeller Alloys 2025-T6 (Table 6.4) 88
3.4 Alloy 6151-T6 (Table 3.4)25 6.5 Alloy 2324-T351 (Table 6.5)89
3.5 Alloy 7079-T6 (Table 3.5)26 6.6 Alloy 3105-O and -H22 (Table 6.6)90
3.6 Alloy 7080-T7 (Table 3.6)27 6.7 Alloy 5457-O and -H25 (Table 6.7)92
3.7 Conclusions about Accuracy and Precision28 6.8 Alloy 6005A-T5 and -T61 (Table 6.8)94
6.9 Alloys 6066-T6 and 6070-T6 (Table 6.9) 96
6.10Alloy 6082-T6 and -T651X (Table 6.10)98
Chapter 4Application of Relational Analysis to Archival 6.11Alloy 6351-T6 (Table 6.11)99
High- and Low-Temperature Tensile Property Data 6.12Alloy 7049-T73 and -T7352 (Table 6.12)100
for Wrought Aluminum Alloys29 6.13Alloy 7076-T6 (Table 6.13)102
4.1 Relational Analyses of Various Tempers of 1xxx and 3xxx 6.14 Permanent Mold (PM) Cast 357.0-T6 and A357.0-T6
Alloys29 (Table 6.14) 103
4.2 Relational Analyses of Various Tempers of 2x24 and Other
2xxx Alloys34
4.3 Relational Analyses of 4032-T643 Chapter 7Application of Relational Analysis to the High-
4.4 Relational Analyses of Various Tempers of 5xxx Aluminum Temperature Tensile Properties of Steel,
Alloys44 Magnesium Alloys, and Titanium Alloys105
4.5 Relational Analyses of Various Tempers of 6xxx Aluminum 7.1 AISI 200 Steels 105
Alloys47 7.2 AISI 300 Steels 107
4.6 Relational Analyses of Various Tempers of 7xxx Aluminum 7.3 AISI 400 Steels 109
Alloys48 7.4 AISI 600 Steels  110
4.7 Comparisons of Relational Analyses for Annealed Non-Heat- 7.5 Representative Examples of Other Steels  113
Treatable Alloys49 7.6 Baseline Relationships and Summary for Steels 115
4.8 Comparisons of Relational Analyses of Some 2xxx, 5xxx, 7.7 Relational Analyses of High-Temperature Moduli for Steels 117
6xxx, and 7xxx Alloys50 7.8 Magnesium Alloys 119
4.9 Application of Relational Analyses to Cryogenic Tensile 7.9 Titanium Alloys125
Properties54
4.10Application of Relational Analyses to Elastic Moduli56 Chapter 8Other Potential Applications of Relational
Analysis127
Chapter 5Application of Relational Analysis to Archival 8.1 Compressive, Shear, and Bearing Design Properties at High
High- and Low-Temperature Tensile Property Data and Low Temperatures127
for Cast Aluminum Alloys59 8.2 Alloy Selection for Equatorial Environments127
5.1 Analysis of Data for the Sand Cast 200.0 Alloy Series59 8.3 Alloy Selection for Enhanced Recycling Rates129
5.2 Analysis of Data for the Permanent Mold Cast 200.0 Alloy
Series61 Chapter 9References 131

iii
iv/Contents

Appendix AResource Data Utilized for Relational Analyses133 Appendix C Terminology and Nomenclature267
A1Compositions and Resource Data for Aluminum Alloys133 Selected Abbreviations267
A2Compositions and Resource Data for Steels 232 Glossary of Selected Terms267
A3Compositions and Resource Data for Magnesium Alloys248
A4Compositions and Resource Data for Titanium Alloys260 Appendix DAluminum Alloy and Temper Designation
Systems271
Alloy Designations271
Appendix B SI/Metric Unit Conversions265 Temper Designations272
Tensile and Tensile Yield Strengths265
Temperature265 Index273
Relational AnalysisGuidelines for Estimating the High- and Low-Temperature Properties of Metals Copyright 2011 ASM International
J.G. Kaufman All rights reserved.
www.asminternational.org

Preface and Acknowledgments

It is the objective of this book to define and describe the potential usefulness of rela-
tional analysis in analyzing and extrapolating the properties of metallic alloys at high tem-
peratures and also for estimating the properties of those alloys for which little or no data
are available.
The use of relational analysis is illustrated by presenting a broad spectrum of high-tem-
perature tensile property data for aluminum alloys, using data generated from a single
source and developed using consistent testing procedures and practices. Data for a number
of steels, magnesium alloys, and titanium alloys from the literature are also presented and
analyzed.
Attention is called to the fact that the estimated high- and low-temperature properties of
metal alloys presented in this book based on the application of relational analysis are just
that, estimates, and have no statistical basis. Therefore, they are not to be considered as the
basis for design. Their usefulness lies primarily in filling in gaps in material property data
and for making preliminary judgments on materials selection and performance.
Attention is also called to the empirical and, to some degree, subjective nature of rela-
tional analysis. For this reason, relational analysis should be used with caution, carefully
considering the guidelines and limitations described in the text of this book.
The author gratefully acknowledges the past support of Alcoa, Inc. in providing the au-
thor and ASM International with access to many previously unpublished data for alu-
minum alloys. The author also acknowledges ASM International for access to a number of
its material property data archives.

v
Relational AnalysisGuidelines for Estimating the High- and Low-Temperature Properties of Metals Copyright 2011 ASM International
J.G. Kaufman All rights reserved.
www.asminternational.org

About the Author

John Gilbert (Gil) Kaufman has a background of over 50 years in the aluminum and
materials information industries and remains an active consultant in both areas. In 1997,
he retired as Vice President of Technology of the Aluminum Association, Inc., then head-
quartered in Washington, D.C. (now in Arlington, VA), and is currently president of his
own consultancy, Kaufman Associates.
Earlier in his career, he spent 26 years with the Aluminum Company of America, where
he managed engineering properties and fabricating metallurgical research at Alcoa Labo-
ratories. Many of the data presented in this book were generated during the period when
the author was active in and/or managing Alcoa Laboratories engineering properties re-
search.
Kaufman subsequently spent five years with ARCO Metals, where he was Director of
Research and Development and, later, Vice President of Research and Engineering.
Kaufman also served for nine years as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Na-
tional Materials Property Data Network where, working with STN International and
Chemical Abstracts Service, he established a worldwide online network of more than 25
numeric materials properties databases.
Gil is a Fellow and Honorary Member of ASTM International and a Fellow and Life
Member of ASM International. He is a licensed professional engineer in Ohio and Dela-
ware. Gil has published more than 140 articles and 5 books on aluminum alloys and mate-
rials data systems.

vi
Relational AnalysisGuidelines for Estimating the High- and Low-Temperature Properties of Metals Copyright 2011 ASM International
J.G. Kaufman All rights reserved.
www.asminternational.org

Chapter 1

Introduction and Background

RELATIONAL ANALYSIS is the quantitative analysis of the
relationships among the known mechanical properties of metals
and alloys at various temperatures to their room-temperature ten-
sile properties, with the object of using the calculated relation-
ships to either interpolate or extrapolate the properties of those
same alloys or to estimate the properties of related or similar al-
loys. The use of relational analysis as defined, that is, by compar-
ing the relationships of the properties at various temperatures to
those at room temperature, has been found to be useful at temper-
atures both above and below room temperature.
While not always recognized by the term relational analysis,
there have been and still are a number of applications of the rela-
tionships among various properties of metal alloys to their room-
temperature tensile properties in use today. For example, for many
years, the room-temperature compression, shear, and bearing de-
sign properties of metal alloys have been generated using the
measured relationships among these properties and the tensile
strengths and tensile yield strengths of those metals. Illustrations
of this may be found in The Aluminum Design Manual (Ref 1), the
American Institute of Steel Constructions Code of Standard
Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges (Ref 2), and the Metallic
Materials Properties Development and Standardization (MMPDS)
Handbook (previously known as MIL-HDBK-5), the aerospace
design bible (Ref 3). These examples are examined more closely
in Section 2.2, Other Examples of Relational Analysis, in Chap-
ter 2 of this book.
been shown to be very useful for the analysis of creep and stress-
rupture data for various metals (Ref 47). The greatest value de-
rived from parametric analysis is for interpolation and extrapola-
tion of high-temperature creep and stress-rupture data in instances
when there is already sufficient data for the alloy in question to
permit derivation of a useful parametric equation, including the
value of a constant that satisfactorily collapses test data taken at
various times at various temperatures into a single relationship, as
in Fig. 1.1. Parametric evaluation has some theoretical basis for its
use (Ref 46).
However, parametric analysis has serious limitations in the
analysis of the tensile properties of these same alloys (Ref 7), as
illustrated in Section 1.2 of this chapter, and by itself is of little
value for this purpose without a reasonable amount of test data for
the specific alloy in question.
In contrast, relational analysis is a purely empirical approach
that provides useful estimates of the high- and low-temperature
tensile properties of alloys for which little or no data are available,
provided that tensile property data for some alloys of similar com-

1.1Relational Analysis of Temperature Effects

Because mechanical properties of many metal alloys are de-

pendent on both the temperature to which they are exposed and
also, for temperatures above room temperature, to the length of
time of exposure at temperature, test programs to define these
properties are extensive and expensive. Some premium is there-
fore placed on procedures that are helpful in maximizing the value
of the generated data, including procedures for interpolating and
extrapolating them and for estimating the properties of similar al-
loys.
One approach to the estimation and extrapolation of some high- Fig. 1.1 Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress-rupture
temperature properties of metals is parametric analysis, which has strengths of welded 5456-H321 plate (5556 filler alloy)
2 /Relational AnalysisGuidelines for Estimating the High- and Low-Temperature Properties of Metals
position are available. Relational analysis is based solely on the
quantitative analysis of the relationships among the properties of
metals at different time-temperature exposures to their original
room-temperature values, as described in more detail in Chapter 2
of this book.
Specifically, relational analysis has great value for analyzing the
high-temperature tensile properties of metals, particularly alu-
minum alloys because of their complex dependence on both time
and temperature of exposure. As illustrated herein, it also seems
to be of use in analyzing data for steels, magnesium alloys, and
titanium alloys, and potentially for other metal alloy systems as
well.
Recommendations for the use of relational analysis are not
meant to exclude the use of any other techniques for analyzing
high-temperature data. Relational analysis is simply another com-
plement to the usual means, notably graphical analysis. In fact, il-
lustrations are provided of the usefulness of graphical analysis in
combination with relational analysis.
1.2Interrelation of Relational Analysis and
Parametric Analysis
It is understandable that there may be some confusion in under-
standing the differences between relational analysis and paramet-
ric analysis of the properties of metals (Ref 47). While both serve
to aid in interpolating and extrapolating properties to conditions
for which test data do not exist, they are quite different.
As noted previously, relational analysis is a purely empirical ap-
proach based on quantitative analysis of the relationships among
the measured properties of metal alloys to their room-temperature
tensile properties. There is little theoretical basis for this at any
Fig. 1.2 Larson-Miller parametric master curve for tensile strengths of 5456-H321 plate. Source: Ref 7
level, because it stems primarily from empirical observations that
the material properties of groups of alloys in many metallic sys-
tems follow patterns that prove useful in predicting those same
properties in similar alloys.
Parametric analysis, on the other hand, uses some of the princi-
ples of rate-process theory (Ref 1, 8, 9) to analyze creep and
stress-rupture properties of metals, leading to time-temperature
parameters useful for the interpolation and extrapolation of those
properties to conditions beyond the range of recorded test data.
Parametric analysis is most useful for creep and stress-rupture
properties, with very limited or no value for tensile properties or
other mechanical properties for which both time and temperature
are not involved, as was illustrated in Ref 7.
In Ref 7, high-temperature tensile strength and tensile yield
strength data for 5456-H321 were analyzed using the Larson-
Miller parameter. Figures 1.2 and 1.3 present the resultant plots
of tensile and yield strength, respectively, as a function of the Lar-
son-Miller parameter. Larson-Miller equation constants of 54 and
46 were used for tensile strength and yield strength, respectively.
As illustrated in Fig. 1.2 and 1.3, the parametric approach does
not work very well at relatively high and relatively low tempera-
tures within the range of interest. It was not possible to identify a
Larson-Miller constant that would bring data across the entire
range of interest into a single relationship. At intermediate tem-
peratures, say 300 to 400 F, some success in interpolating or ex-
trapolating may be possible, but the overall parametric relation-
ship is of little value, especially at temperatures of 450 F and
higher.
This is in contrast to the case for stress-rupture data for 5456-
H321. As illustrated in Fig. 1.1, a relatively smooth and consistent
Larson-Miller parametric relationship was developed for the
stress-rupture strengths of welded 5456-H321. That relationship

Fig. 1.3 Larson-Miller parametric master curve for tensile yield strengths of 5456-H321 plate. Source Ref 7
would be quite useful for either interpolation or extrapolation over
the entire temperature range.
In summary, it appears that these two types of analysispara-
metric and relationalstand alone in their value in achieving
specific objectives. As noted, parametric analysis is useful for
interpolation and extrapolation of high-temperature creep and
stress-rupture data when there is already sufficient data for the
Chapter 1:Introduction and Background/3
alloy in question to permit derivation of a single time-temperature
parameter (Fig. 1.1). In contrast, relational analysis is a purely
empirical approach that provides useful estimates of the high-tem-
perature tensile properties of alloys for which little or no data are
available, provided that tensile property data for some alloys of
similar composition are available
Relational AnalysisGuidelines for Estimating the High- and Low-Temperature Properties of Metals
J.G. Kaufman
Chapter 2
Relational Analysis Procedures
RELATIONAL ANALYSIS, defined as quantitative analysis of
the relationships of high- and low-temperature properties in rela-
tion to their room-temperature values, provides a useful technique
for estimating the properties of similar metals and alloys for which
limited or no data are available. This results from the fact that
within specific alloy compositions and/or temper/production prac-
tices, some relative uniformity in the relationships is often ob-
served and can be used in estimating the properties of other mate-
rials of the same or similar type(s).
The method of relational analysis is described in this chapter,
along with some specific guidelines and caveats in its use. Subse-
quent chapters illustrate the application of relational analysis of
wrought and cast aluminum alloys, including its application in
Chapter 6 to estimate the properties of wrought and cast aluminum
alloys for which few or no test data exist. Chapter 7 illustrates the
application of relational analysis to data for steels, magnesium al-
loys, and titanium alloys. Chapter 8 includes speculation about
some additional applications of relational analysis in judging
properties and performance of metals.
As noted in Chapter 1, the use of relational analysis is not meant
to exclude the use of other techniques, such as parametric analysis
of time-temperature conditions for creep deformation and stress
rupture. Relational analysis is simply a quantitative method of an-
alyzing the relationships among the known mechanical properties
of metals and alloys at various temperatures relative to their room-
temperature tensile properties. The objective of using the calcu-
lated relationships is either to interpolate or extrapolate the prop-
erties of those same alloys or to estimate the properties of related
or similar alloys that have not previously been tested. The use of
relational analysis also has been found to be useful at tempera-
tures both above and below room temperature.
The source data for the relational analyses discussed herein are
from Ref 8 to 12. Because relational analysis may be relatively
subjective by nature, depending on the breadth of available source
data, all of the source data used in analyses discussed herein are
presented in Appendix A, along with their relational analyses.
Readers are encouraged to carry out their own analyses of the
available information, and reach their own conclusions.
It is appropriate to note at this point that throughout most of this
book, the principal focus is placed on the calculation and presen-
tation of mechanical properties in the English or engineering sys-
Copyright 2011 ASM International
All rights reserved.
www.asminternational.org
tem rather than the International System of Units (SI) or metric
units. This was done because all of the tabular and graphical data
presented herein were generated using the English/engineering
system, and conversions would have added potential confusion
and unnecessarily odd numbers for temperatures and properties.
For those interested in SI/metric units and methods for the conver-
sion of data herein to SI/metric equivalents, attention is called to
the conversions listed in Appendix B.
There are several terms and abbreviations used regularly in the
text, tables, and figures that are noted as follows:

Baseline relationship: The relationship calculated by rela-
tional analysis with data from one or more source alloys to
be used to estimate the high- and/or low-temperature proper-
ties of a target alloy

Source data or source alloy(s): Data for an alloy or alloys for
which high- and/or low-temperature data are used for rela-
tional analyses

Target alloy: An alloy for which estimates of high- and/or low-
temperature properties are desired using relational analysis

TS: Tensile strength, ultimate tensile strength

TYS or YS: Tensile yield strength, at 0.2% offset unless other-
wise noted

El or Elong: Elongation in 2 in. or 4D, where D is the speci-
men diameter

T: Test temperature

t: Time at test temperature

Avg: Average relationship for the property and/or baseline
group being analyzed
A broader list of definitions of terms is provided in Appendix C,
Terminology and Nomenclature, and the alloy and temper des-
ignations used herein for aluminum alloys are described in Ap-
pendix D.
One important caveat concerning the use of relational analysis
involves the character of the resources, that is, the test data, used
in the analysis. For optimum results, it is highly desirable that the
collections of actual test data used as the starting point have been
obtained, analyzed, and reported using the same test procedures,
including, ideally from the same laboratory. This ideal is met
nicely for the aluminum alloys in this study by using the substan-
tial archive of high- and low-temperature data obtained for alu-
6 /Relational AnalysisGuidelines for Estimating the High- and Low-Temperature Properties of Metals
minum alloys at various temperatures at Alcoa Laboratories and
made available previously for publication by ASM International
(Ref 10). Illustrations of the use of these principles for other me-
tallic alloys, including steels (Ref 11), magnesium alloys (Ref 8,
12), and titanium alloys (Ref 9), are also provided herein, although
such a consistent comparable archive of reliable data for these al-
loys was not available to the author.
2.1Procedure for Relational Analysis of Tensile
Properties with Temperature
From the original tensile property data, relational analyses are
made of the data for the individual alloys and tempers, leading to
tabulations of baseline percentages of room-temperature tensile
strength, tensile yield strength, and elongation as a function of
temperature. These are the relationships that may be used in inter-
polating and extrapolating from existing data or estimating the
properties of similar alloys for which no data are available. Typi-
cally, most attention is paid to the relationships for tensile strength
and tensile yield strength rather than to those for elongations, be-
cause the latter are not typically used in quantitative assessments
of alloy performance.
To illustrate the usual procedures for the application of rela-
tional analysis, the tensile properties of several Al-Mg-Si (6xxx-
series) aluminum alloys at high and low temperatures are consid-
ered first. The original resource data are shown in Tables A1.19
through A1.23 in Appendix A1; they describe the effects of time at
temperature on the tensile properties of several 6xxx-series alloys:
6061, 6063, 6101, 6262, and 6351.
Continuing the illustration, these baseline relationships are de-
veloped in the following manner:
1.The tensile properties of each of the alloy(s) in question for
which data are available are input to Excel (or other numerical)
spreadsheets of the type in Table 2.1, using 6061-T6 as the ex-
ample. Similar analyses are made for each of the alloys in the
group being studied, in this case, the other four 6xxx alloys
mentioned earlier.
2.The relationships generated for the several alloys being studied
are combined into a table of the type shown in Table 2.2, in
three parts, for tensile strength, tensile yield strength, and elon-
gation. This places the alloys where the relationships for the
alloys in question can be readily compared and, where appro-
priate, averaged.
3.Using the data tabulated in Table 2.2, comparisons are made to
establish the similarities and divergences of the alloys in ques-
tion, to see which may be averaged to determine baseline rela-
tionships for some or all of the alloys and tempers. In this case,
it appears that data for all of these alloys in the T5 and T6 tem-
pers follow relatively similar patterns, while the pattern for the
one T9 temper alloy differs a bit and should not be averaged in
with the others.
4.Based on the analysis of data of the type in Table 2.2, the base-
line values are calculated for tensile strength, tensile yield
strength, and elongation; they are presented in Table 2.3 as the
baseline relationships for 6xxx alloys. While data for only one
alloy led to the relationship shown for the T9 temper, it still
represents the best information available for use as a baseline.
To illustrate how this information would be applied in estimat-
ing the tensile properties of another alloy for which little or no
data are available, estimates were derived in Table 2.4 of the high-
and low-temperature tensile properties of 6151-T6. This is an
alloy not included in the original analysis described in Tables 2.1
and 2.2 but for which some high-temperature tensile property data
were available. The following are tabulated in Table 2.4:
Source relationships for 6xxx alloys in the T5 or T6 tempers
from Table 2.2
Estimated properties of 6151-T6 based on relational analysis
(i.e., multiplying the percentages in the previous column times
the room-temperature typical tensile properties of 6151-T6)
Previously independently measured properties for that alloy
and temper for comparison
The agreement between the properties estimated using relational
analysis (columns 2, 5, and 8) and the measured tensile properties
(columns 3, 6, and 9) is reasonably good over the entire range.
There are differences of as much as 2 or 3 ksi, but such differences
are normal for different lots of the same alloy and temper. Overall,
the relational analysis has provided reasonable estimates of the
high- and low-temperature tensile properties of 6151-T6.
2.2 Other Examples of Relational Analysis
As noted in Chapter 1, estimated design properties have been
derived for many years using a form of relational analysis, that is,
by using the relationships between the properties in question and
the room-temperature tensile properties. Some specific illustra-
tions are given here.
Structural Design Properties in Metallic Materials Proper-
ties Development and Standardization (MMPDS) Handbook
(Ref 3). The generation of expected minimum (design) values of
metallic alloys for use in aircraft structures, as defined in Chapter
9 of MMPDS (formerly known as MIL-HDBK-5), the structural
design bible for the aircraft industry, is carried out by:
1.Measuring the properties of interest, typically the tensile, com-
pression, shear, and bearing properties, for a representative
sampling (usually at least ten lots) of the alloy and temper in
question
2.Calculating the average ratios of the compression, shear, and
bearing properties to the tensile properties of the same lots, and
noting specifically the average ratios of shear strength and
bearing ultimate strength to the tensile strength and the ratios
of compressive yield strength and bearing yield strength to the
tensile yield strength.
3.Using those relationships to generate the expected minimum or
design compression, shear, and bearing properties by multiply-
ing those ratios times the guaranteed minimum tensile strength
and tensile yield strength of that same alloy and temper. The
guaranteed tensile properties are those expected to be met by
99% of lots with 95% confidence.
 Chapter 2:Relational Analysis Procedures/7

Table 2.1Example of relational analysis of high- and low-temperature tensile properties of 6061-T6
Tensile
yield Elongation
Tensile strength, Tensile strength, in 2 in. or 4D,
Test Holding Tensile % of room- yield % of room- Elongation % of room-
Alloy temperature, temperature, Holding strength, temperature strength, temperature in 2 in. temperature
name UNS No. Temper F F time, h ksi value ksi value or 4D, % value
6061 A96061 T6, T651 452 . . 74 164 53 133 27 159
6061 A96061 T6, T651 423 . . 73 162 53 133 27 159
6061 A96061 T6, T651 320 . . 58 129 46 115 23 135
6061 A96061 T6, T651 112 . . 49 109 42 105 19 112
6061 A96061 T6, T651 18 . . 47 104 41 103 18 106
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 . . 45 100 40 100 17 100
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 212 10 45 100 40 100 17 100
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 212 1000 46 102 41 103 17 100
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 212 10,000 46 102 42 105 17 100
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 300 10 46 102 41 103 16 94
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 300 1000 43 96 40 100 16 94
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 300 10,000 39 87 35 88 17 100
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 350 10 44 98 40 100 16 94
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 350 1000 38 84 34 85 16 94
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 350 10,000 33 73 27 68 18 106
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 400 10 40 89 36 90 16 94
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 400 1000 31 69 24 60 17 100
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 400 10,000 26 58 18 45 19 112
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 450 10 34 76 28 70 17 100
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 450 1000 25 56 15 38 19 112
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 450 10,000 20 44 11 28 24 114
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 500 10 29 64 20 50 18 106
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 500 1000 21 47 10 25 24 141
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 500 10,000 18 40 8 20 30 176
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 600 10 23 51 12 30 22 129
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 600 1000 18 40 8 20 30 176
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 600 10,000 18 40 8 20 30 176
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 700 10 18 40 8 20 30 176
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 700 1000 18 40 8 20 30 176
6061 A96061 T6, T651 75 700 10,000 18 40 8 20 30 176
6061 A96061 T6, T651 212 212 10 41 91 38 95 18 106
6061 A96061 T6, T651 212 212 1000 42 93 39 98 18 106
6061 A96061 T6, T651 212 212 10,000 42 93 39 98 18 106
6061 A96061 T6, T651 300 300 10 38 84 36 90 19 112
6061 A96061 T6, T651 300 300 1000 38 84 36 90 18 106
6061 A96061 T6, T651 300 300 10,000 33 73 31 78 19 112
6061 A96061 T6, T651 350 350 10 36 80 35 88 18 106
6061 A96061 T6, T651 350 350 1000 30 67 28 70 19 112
6061 A96061 T6, T651 350 350 10,000 24 53 22 55 22 129
6061 A96061 T6, T651 400 400 10 30 67 29 73 18 106
6061 A96061 T6, T651 400 400 1000 22 49 20 50 23 135
6061 A96061 T6, T651 400 400 10,000 17 38 14 35 28 165
6061 A96061 T6, T651 450 450 10 24 53 23 58 18 106
6061 A96061 T6, T651 450 450 1000 15 33 13 33 30 176
6061 A96061 T6, T651 450 450 10,000 12 27 8.5 21 40 235
6061 A96061 T6, T651 500 500 10 18 40 16 40 20 118
6061 A96061 T6, T651 500 500 1000 10 22 8 20 45 265
6061 A96061 T6, T651 500 500 10,000 8 18 6 15 65 382
6061 A96061 T6, T651 600 600 10 9 20 8 20 30 176
6061 A96061 T6, T651 600 600 1000 5 11 4.2 11 80 471
6061 A96061 T6, T651 600 600 10,000 5 11 4.2 11 80 471
6061 A96061 T6, T651 700 700 10 3.6 8 3 8 80 471
6061 A96061 T6, T651 700 700 1000 3.6 8 3 8 80 471
6061 A96061 T6, T651 700 700 10,000 3.6 8 3 8 80 471

Note: D, specimen diameter. Source: Ref 10

This application of the average relationships represents an exam-
ple of relational analysis as it is defined in this book.
Bearing Design Properties of Aluminum Alloys in The Alu-
minum Design Manual (ADM) (Ref 1). Another example of the
application of relational analysis in the aluminum industry is the
treatment of bearing design strength, the stress that will produce
an unacceptable deformation at a bolt or rivet hole, in the ADM
(Ref 1). It has been determined from years of testing in accord-
ance with ASTM E 238 and confirmed more recently in a study
conducted by Dr. Craig Mensemer at the University of Akron (Ref
13) that the bearing ultimate stress for aluminum is approximately
equal to twice the tensile ultimate strength, or Fbru = 2Ftu. This is
8 /Relational AnalysisGuidelines for Estimating the High- and Low-Temperature Properties of Metals

Table 2.2Relational analysis of high- and low-temperature tensile properties of 6xxx-series aluminum alloys
Testing Holding Holding Tensile strength, % of room-temperature value
temperature, temperature, time,
F F h 6061-T6 6063-T5 6063-T6 6101-T6 6262-T9 6351-T5 6351-T6 Avg T5 Avg T6 Avg 6xxx
452 . . 164 175 . . . . . 175 164 170
423 . . 162 . . . . . . . 162 162
320 . . 129 134 134 134 128 131 131 133 132 132
112 . . 109 109 109 113 107 113 113 111 111 110
18 . . 104 103 103 106 103 107 106 105 105 105
75 . . 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
75 212 10 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
75 212 1000 102 103 106 100 102 102 104 103 103 103
75 212 10,000 102 103 109 100 98 100 100 102 103 102
75 300 10 102 103 106 100 98 100 102 102 103 102
75 300 1000 96 100 97 94 86 87 85 94 93 92
75 300 10,000 87 81 80 84 72 73 73 77 81 79
75 350 10 98 103 103 97 91 98 98 101 99 98
75 350 1000 84 78 77 81 66 67 73 73 79 75
75 350 10,000 73 69 60 63 52 51 58 60 64 61
75 400 10 89 91 83 91 78 80 83 86 87 85
75 400 1000 69 66 57 63 50 51 58 59 62 59
75 400 10,000 58 53 46 47 40 38 42 46 48 46
75 450 10 76 78 71 78 62 69 71 74 74 72
75 450 1000 56 56 46 47 41 42 42 49 48 47
75 450 10,000 44 41 37 41 36 33 31 37 38 38
75 500 10 64 66 57 63 52 53 58 60 61 59
75 500 1000 47 41 40 41 38 38 35 40 41 40
75 500 10,000 40 38 34 41 34 38 . 38 38 38
75 600 10 51 50 40 44 40 38 40 44 44 43
75 600 1000 40 38 31 38 34 36 . 37 36 36
75 600 10,000 40 38 31 38 31 . . 38 36 36
75 700 10 40 44 37 41 38 . . 38 39 40
75 700 1000 40 34 31 38 . . . 31 36 36
75 700 10,000 40 34 29 38 . . . 31 36 35
212 212 10 91 91 89 88 95 89 90 90 90 90
212 212 1000 93 91 91 88 95 91 90 91 91 91
212 212 10,000 93 94 94 88 91 91 90 93 91 92
300 300 10 84 84 80 78 86 80 81 82 81 82
300 300 1000 84 81 80 75 74 67 67 74 77 75
300 300 10,000 73 66 63 66 60 56 56 61 65 63
350 350 10 80 84 71 72 72 73 73 79 74 75
350 350 1000 67 56 57 59 50 49 52 53 59 56
350 350 10,000 53 50 40 47 38 38 46 44 47 45
400 400 10 67 63 57 59 55 56 54 60 59 59
400 400 1000 49 44 37 41 33 33 35 39 41 39
400 400 10,000 38 34 26 31 24 21 25 28 30 28
450 450 10 53 50 43 47 40 42 44 46 47 46
450 450 1000 33 34 23 27 22 20 19 27 26 25
450 450 10,000 27 23 17 22 19 16 13 20 20 20
500 500 10 40 38 29 34 26 27 33 33 34 32
500 500 1000 22 20 14 17 16 12 . 16 18 17
500 500 10,000 18 16 13 15 15 . . 16 15 15
600 600 10 20 20 11 15 12 . . 20 15 16
600 600 1000 11 11 9 10 9 . . 11 10 10
600 600 10,000 11 10 9 9 9 . . 10 10 10
700 700 10 8 8 7 8 7 . . 8 8 8
700 700 1000 8 7 7 8 6 . . 7 8 7
700 700 10,000 8 6 7 8 6 . . 3 8 7

Testing Holding Holding Tensile yield strength, % of room-temperature value

temperature, temperature, time,
F F h 6061-T6 6063-T5 6063-T6 6101-T6 6262-T9 6351-T5 6351-T6 Avg T5 Avg T6 Avg 6xxx
452 . . 133 129 . . . . . 129 133 131
423 . . 133 . . . . . . . 133 133
320 . . 115 114 116 118 122 115 107 115 114 115
112 . . 105 104 106 107 105 107 104 106 106 105
18 . . 103 100 103 104 102 105 100 103 103 102
75 . . 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
75 212 10 100 100 100 100 100 100 104 100 101 101
75 212 1000 103 104 106 100 102 105 100 105 102 103
75 212 10,000 105 107 110 100 98 102 102 105 104 103
(continued)

Note: D, specimen diameter. Source: Ref 10

 Chapter 2:Relational Analysis Procedures/9

Table 2.2 (continued)

Testing Holding Holding Tensile yield strength, % of room-temperature value
temperature, temperature, time,
F F h 6061-T6 6063-T5 6063-T6 6101-T6 6262-T9 6351-T5 6351-T6 Avg T5 Avg T6 Avg 6xxx
75 300 10 103 104 106 100 98 102 84 103 98 94
75 300 1000 100 100 97 89 87 83 67 92 88 89
75 300 10,000 88 71 74 75 71 63 98 67 84 77
75 350 10 100 104 100 96 93 98 67 101 91 94
75 350 1000 85 104 68 71 62 59 47 82 68 71
75 350 10,000 68 54 45 50 45 37 78 46 60 54
75 400 10 90 89 45 82 76 73 47 81 66 72
75 400 1000 60 50 42 46 44 37 24 44 43 43
75 400 10,000 45 36 26 29 33 21 64 29 41 36
75 450 10 70 64 58 64 58 59 27 62 55 57
75 450 1000 38 39 26 29 35 24 18 32 28 30
75 450 10,000 28 23 18 21 29 12 44 18 28 25
75 500 10 50 50 42 46 45 37 16 44 39 41
75 500 1000 25 23 18 20 29 17 12 20 19 21
75 500 10,000 20 18 16 17 27 17 . 18 18 19
75 600 10 30 29 23 21 31 17 20 23 24 24
75 600 1000 20 16 15 14 24 13 . 15 16 17
75 600 10,000 20 14 13 14 22 . . 14 16 17
75 700 10 20 20 16 25 24 . . 41 20 21
75 700 1000 20 13 13 14 . . . 31 16 15
75 700 10,000 20 13 11 14 . . . 31 15 15
212 212 10 95 93 90 89 95 93 93 93 92 93
212 212 1000 98 93 97 89 95 95 93 94 94 94
212 212 10,000 98 96 100 89 93 95 93 96 95 95
300 300 10 90 89 84 89 85 85 84 87 87 87
300 300 1000 90 86 87 79 75 68 69 77 81 79
300 300 10,000 78 61 65 68 62 54 53 58 66 63
350 350 10 88 89 71 79 73 78 76 84 79 79
350 350 1000 70 57 58 57 51 49 53 53 60 56
350 350 10,000 55 43 35 43 38 34 47 39 45 42
400 400 10 73 68 58 64 55 59 56 64 63 62
400 400 1000 50 39 32 39 31 32 33 36 39 37
400 400 10,000 35 30 21 25 24 17 18 24 25 24
450 450 10 58 50 42 46 36 44 44 47 48 46
450 450 1000 33 29 19 23 18 18 17 24 23 22
450 450 10,000 21 20 15 17 16 12 9 16 16 16
500 500 10 40 36 19 30 22 27 31 32 30 29
500 500 1000 20 18 13 15 13 12 . 15 16 15
500 500 10,000 15 13 11 12 13 . . 13 13 13
600 600 10 20 20 11 13 9 . . 20 15 15
600 600 1000 11 10 8 9 7 . . 10 9 9
600 600 10,000 11 9 8 8 7 . . 9 9 9
700 700 10 8 8 6 6 4 . . 8 7 6
700 700 1000 8 7 6 6 4 . . 7 7 6
700 700 10,000 8 6 6 6 4 . . 6 7 6
Testing Holding Holding Elongation in 2 in. or 4D, % of room-temperature value
temperature, temperature, time,
F F h 6061-T6 6063-T5 6063-T6 6101-T6 6262-T9 6351-T5 6351-T6 AVG T5 Avg T6 Avg 6xxx
452 . . 159 136 . . . . . 136 159 148
423 . . 159 . . . . . . . 159 159
320 . . 135 123 133 126 140 155 127 139 130 134
112 . . 112 109 111 105 110 100 100 105 107 107
18 . . 106 105 106 100 100 100 100 103 103 102
75 . . 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
75 212 10 100 100 94 100 100 91 100 96 99 98
75 212 1000 100 95 89 100 100 91 91 93 95 95
75 212 10,000 100 91 83 100 110 91 91 91 94 95
75 300 10 94 100 78 100 100 100 100 100 93 96
75 300 1000 94 91 72 105 120 100 100 96 93 97
75 300 10,000 100 105 111 105 140 127 127 116 111 116
75 350 10 94 95 89 100 110 100 100 98 96 98
75 350 1000 94 95 100 105 140 127 127 111 107 113
75 350 10,000 106 109 144 126 170 173 173 141 137 143
75 400 10 94 91 100 105 130 109 109 100 102 105
75 400 1000 100 100 133 111 190 173 173 137 129 140
75 400 10,000 112 118 189 147 230 273 273 196 180 192
(continued)

Note: D, specimen diameter. Source: Ref 10

10 /Relational AnalysisGuidelines for Estimating the High- and Low-Temperature Properties of Metals

Table 2.2 (continued)

Testing Holding Holding Elongation in 2 in. or 4D, % of room-temperature value
temperature, temperature, time,
F F h 6061-T6 6063-T5 6063-T6 6101-T6 6262-T9 6351-T5 6351-T6 AVG T5 Avg T6 Avg 6xxx
75 450 10 100 95 111 105 160 127 127 111 111 118
75 450 1000 112 118 167 188 220 218 218 168 171 177
75 450 10,000 114 159 233 184 240 364 364 262 224 237
75 500 10 106 109 122 116 180 155 155 132 125 157
75 500 1000 141 159 200 211 240 318 309 239 215 225
75 500 10,000 176 182 250 211 250 318 . 250 212 231
75 600 10 129 136 206 184 220 235 236 186 189 192
75 600 1000 176 182 250 237 260 318 . 250 221 237
75 600 10,000 176 182 250 237 270 . . 182 221 223
75 700 10 176 182 228 158 260 . . 182 187 201
75 700 1000 176 182 250 237 . . . 182 221 211
75 700 10,000 176 182 250 237 . . . 182 221 211
212 212 10 106 100 111 105 100 127 118 114 110 110
212 212 1000 106 100 106 105 100 118 109 109 107 106
212 212 10,000 106 100 83 105 110 109 127 105 105 106
300 300 10 112 105 111 105 100 127 136 116 116 114
300 300 1000 106 105 83 105 130 136 164 121 115 118
300 300 10,000 112 127 111 105 160 164 127 146 114 129
350 350 10 106 109 94 105 120 127 173 118 120 119
350 350 1000 112 136 89 126 190 173 209 155 134 148
350 350 10,000 129 159 161 158 250 236 164 198 153 180
400 400 10 106 118 100 111 160 164 218 141 134 140
400 400 1000 135 159 167 158 260 218 364 189 206 209
400 400 10,000 165 205 222 211 350 318 145 262 186 231
450 450 10 106 136 122 142 210 145 273 141 161 162
450 450 1000 176 205 278 137 350 273 409 239 250 261
450 450 10,000 235 250 333 289 400 409 200 330 264 302
500 500 10 118 159 167 184 280 200 364 180 208 210
500 500 1000 265 273 361 368 450 364 . 319 331 347
500 500 10,000 382 318 417 421 500 . . 318 407 408
600 600 10 176 250 306 368 500 . . 250 283 320
600 600 1000 471 386 417 474 650 . . 386 454 480
600 600 10,000 471 386 444 526 700 . . 386 480 505
700 700 10 471 409 556 553 750 . . 409 527 548
700 700 1000 471 455 583 553 900 . . 455 536 292
700 700 10,000 471 455 583 553 900 . . 455 536 592

Note: D, specimen diameter. Source: Ref 10

addressed in the 2010 ADM, Part I, Section J.3.7 and J.4.7, and the
corresponding commentary in Part II, wherein the bearing design
strength is calculated using this ratio.
The steel industry uses the same approach, citing in the Ameri-
can Institute of Steel Constructions structural steel design code
(Ref 2) that the ultimate bearing strength for steels is 2.4 times the
ultimate tensile strength for steels.
2.3 Cautions in Using Relational Analysis
The usefulness of relational analysis is detailed in subsequent
chapters for aluminum, steel, magnesium, and titanium alloys,
with the greatest emphasis on aluminum because of the more
complex dependence of its strength on both time and temperature
of exposure, and the availability of a wealth of archival data (Ref
10). Relationships have been shown to be fairly consistent within
individual alloy series for each metal, sometimes with some con-
sistency also with fabrication practice.
It is appropriate to note several very important cautions when
preparing to use relational analysis to estimate the properties of an
alloy for which high- and/or low-temperature properties are not
available. Several such cautions are noted here, particularly with
respect to the selection of so-called resource alloys in establish-
ing reliable baseline relationships. Resource alloys should be as
similar as possible in terms of alloy composition and fabrication
methods.
The most reliable baseline relationships are those developed
using multiple source alloys for the type of alloy and temper rep-
resented by the target alloy for which properties are to be esti-
mated. A greater number of source alloys used to develop baseline
relationships improves the level of confidence. It is also beneficial
to have consistent data for the multiple source alloys (i.e., data for
the same combinations of time and temperature for each of the
source alloys). For those temperatures or exposure times at tem-
perature for which data for one or more of the source alloys are
missing, the remaining data may skew the average relationships.
The most reliable relationships are those for which actual test data
for all source alloys are represented at all time-temperature test
conditions being analyzed.
For all of these reasons, each discussed below in more detail, it
is important to consider all high- or low-temperature data derived
with relational analysis to be estimated values, not to be used in
design without verification testing.
 Chapter 2:Relational Analysis Procedures/11

Table 2.3 Summary of relationships among tensile properties for various tempers of 6xxx aluminum alloys at various
temperatures
Average relationships, % of room-temperature value

Tensile strength Tensile yield strength Elongation in 4D

Testing Holding
temperature, temperature Holding Avg T5 Avg T5 Avg T5
F F time, h Avg T5 Avg T6 and T6 Avg T9 Avg T5 Avg T6 and T6 Avg T9 Avg T5 Avg T6 and T6 Avg T9
452 . . 175 164 170 . 129 133 131 . 136 159 148 .
423 . . . 162 162 . . 133 133 . . 159 159 .
320 . . 133 132 132 128 115 114 114 122 139 130 133 140
112 . . 111 111 111 107 106 106 106 105 105 107 106 110
18 . . 105 105 105 103 103 103 103 102 103 103 103 100
75 . . 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
75 212 10 100 100 100 100 100 101 101 100 96 99 98 100
75 212 1000 103 103 103 102 105 102 103 102 93 95 94 100
75 212 10,000 102 103 102 98 105 104 104 98 91 94 93 110
75 300 10 102 103 102 98 103 98 100 98 100 93 95 100
75 300 1000 94 93 93 86 92 88 89 87 96 93 94 120
75 300 10,000 77 81 80 72 67 84 78 71 116 111 113 140
75 350 10 101 99 100 91 101 91 94 93 98 96 96 110
75 350 1000 73 79 77 66 82 68 72 62 111 107 108 140
75 350 10,000 60 64 62 52 46 60 55 45 141 137 139 170
75 400 10 86 87 86 78 81 66 71 76 100 102 101 130
75 400 1000 59 62 61 50 44 43 43 44 137 129 132 190
75 400 10,000 46 48 47 40 29 41 37 33 196 180 185 230
75 450 10 74 74 74 62 62 55 57 58 111 111 111 160
75 450 1000 49 48 48 41 32 28 29 35 168 171 170 220
75 450 10,000 37 38 38 36 18 28 24 29 262 224 236 240
75 500 10 60 61 60 52 44 39 40 45 132 125 127 180
75 500 1000 40 41 40 38 20 19 19 29 239 215 223 240
75 500 10,000 38 38 38 34 18 18 18 27 250 212 227 250
75 600 10 44 44 44 40 23 24 23 31 186 189 188 220
75 600 1000 37 36 37 34 15 16 16 24 250 221 233 260
75 600 10,000 38 36 37 31 14 16 15 22 182 221 211 270
75 700 10 38 39 41 38 20 20 20 24 182 187 186 260
75 700 1000 31 36 36 . 13 16 15 . 182 221 211 .
75 700 10,000 31 36 35 . 13 15 15 . 182 221 211 .
212 212 10 90 90 90 95 93 92 92 95 114 110 111 100
212 212 1000 91 91 91 95 94 94 94 95 109 107 107 100
212 212 10,000 93 91 92 91 96 95 95 93 105 105 105 110
300 300 10 82 81 81 86 87 87 87 85 116 116 116 100
300 300 1000 74 77 76 74 77 81 80 75 121 115 117 130
300 300 10,000 61 65 63 60 58 66 63 62 146 114 124 160
350 350 10 79 74 76 72 84 79 80 73 118 120 119 120
350 350 1000 53 59 57 50 53 60 57 51 155 134 141 190
350 350 10,000 44 47 46 38 39 45 43 38 198 153 168 250
400 400 10 60 59 59 55 64 63 63 55 141 134 136 160
400 400 1000 39 41 40 33 36 39 38 31 189 206 200 260
400 400 10,000 28 30 29 24 24 25 24 24 262 186 211 350
450 450 10 46 47 47 40 47 48 47 36 141 161 154 210
450 450 1000 27 26 26 22 24 23 23 18 239 250 246 350
450 450 10,000 20 20 20 19 16 16 16 16 330 264 286 400
500 500 10 33 34 34 26 32 30 31 22 180 208 199 280
500 500 1000 16 18 17 16 15 16 16 13 319 331 326 450
500 500 10,000 16 15 16 15 13 13 13 13 318 407 385 500
600 600 10 10 15 17 12 20 15 16 9 250 283 275 500
600 600 1000 6 10 10 9 10 9 10 7 386 454 437 650
600 600 10,000 5 10 10 9 9 9 9 7 386 480 457 700
700 700 10 4 8 8 7 8 7 7 4 409 527 497 750
700 700 1000 4 8 8 6 7 7 7 4 455 536 516 900
700 700 10,000 3 8 7 6 6 7 7 4 455 536 516 900

Note: D, specimen diameter. Source: Ref 10

Composition Variables. As already noted in the latter part of
Section 2.1 of this chapter, relationships of high- and low-temper-
ature properties to room-temperature properties vary with compo-
sition, especially with significant differences in major alloying el-
ements. Therefore, it is important to select a resource alloy or
alloys (i.e., those whose relationships will be used as the pattern
for estimating properties) with a composition as close to that of
the target alloy as possible. An illustration of the challenges that
may be encountered when relational analysis is carried out using
source alloys with different alloying elements from those in the
target alloy is shown in the example for 2021-T8 in Section 3.2 in
Chapter 3 of this book.
Fabrication Variables. In some cases, relationships also vary
with fabrication practice or temper. Therefore, it is important to
12 /Relational AnalysisGuidelines for Estimating the High- and Low-Temperature Properties of Metals

Table 2.4Relational analysis prediction accuracy for high- and low-temperature tensile properties of aluminum alloy 6151-
T6
Tensile strength (TS) Tensile yield strength (TYS) Elongation (El) in 4D

Avg from tests Avg from tests Avg from tests

6xxx-T6, 6xxx-T6, Predicted Measured 6xxx-T6,
Testing Holding % of room- Predicted Measured % of room- TYS TYS % of room- Predicted
temperature temperature, Holding temperature TS 6151-T6, TS 6151-T6, temperature 6151-T6, 6151-T6, temperature El 6151-T6,
F F time, h TS ksi ksi TYS ksi ksi El 6151-T6, % %
452 . . 164 79 . 133 57 . 159 27 .
423 . . 162 78 . 133 57 . 159 27 .
320 . . 132 63 57 114 49 50 130 22 20
112 . . 111 53 50 106 46 46 107 18 17
18 . . 105 50 49 103 44 45 103 18 17
75 . . 100 48 48 100 43 43 100 17 17
75 212 10 100 48 48 101 43 43 99 17 17
75 212 1000 103 49 48 102 44 43 95 16 17
75 212 10,000 103 49 48 104 45 43 94 16 17
75 300 10 103 49 48 98 42 43 93 16 17
75 300 1000 93 45 42 88 38 38 93 16 17
75 300 10,000 81 39 36 84 36 30 111 19 17
75 350 10 99 48 46 91 39 42 96 16 17
75 350 1000 79 38 37 68 29 30 107 18 17
75 350 10,000 64 31 28 60 26 21 137 23 18
75 400 10 87 42 42 66 28 30 102 17 17
75 400 1000 62 30 30 43 18 21 129 22 18
75 400 10,000 48 23 22 41 18 14 180 31 19
75 450 10 74 36 36 55 24 27 111 19 17
75 450 1000 48 23 22 28 12 13 171 29 22
75 450 10,000 38 18 18 28 12 10 224 38 28
75 500 10 61 29 29 39 17 21 125 21 18
75 500 1000 41 20 16 19 8.2 8.0 215 37 30
75 500 10,000 38 18 16 18 7.7 8.0 212 36 35
75 600 10 44 21 19 24 10.3 9.5 189 32 24
75 600 1000 36 17 16 16 6.9 8.0 221 38 33
75 600 10,000 36 17 16 16 6.9 8.0 221 38 33
75 700 10 39 19 18 20 8.6 8.5 187 32 27
75 700 1000 36 17 16 16 6.9 8.0 221 38 33
75 700 10,000 36 17 16 15 6.5 8.0 221 38 33
212 212 10 90 43 43 92 40 40 110 19 17
212 212 1000 91 44 43 94 40 40 107 18 17
212 212 10,000 91 44 43 95 41 40 105 18 17
300 300 10 81 39 39 87 37 37 116 20 16
300 300 1000 77 37 33 81 35 32 115 20 18
300 300 10,000 65 31 28 66 28 28 114 19 20
350 350 10 74 36 34 79 34 33 120 20 16
350 350 1000 59 28 27 60 26 25 134 23 19
350 350 10,000 47 23 20 45 19 18 153 26 24
400 400 10 59 28 29 63 27 18 134 23 16
400 400 1000 41 20 20 39 17 18 206 35 22
400 400 10,000 30 14 14 25 11 12 186 32 30
450 450 10 47 23 23 48 21 21 161 27 27
450 450 1000 26 12 13 23 9.9 11 250 43 16
450 450 10,000 20 10 9.5 16 6.9 7.0 264 45 31
500 500 10 34 16 17 30 13 15 208 35 16
500 500 1000 18 8.6 7.0 16 6.9 5.5 331 56 45
500 500 10,000 15 7.2 6.5 13 5.6 5.5 407 69 50
600 600 10 15 7.2 6.0 15 6.5 5.0 283 48 30
600 600 1000 10 4.8 5.0 9 3.9 3.9 454 77 40
600 600 10,000 10 4.8 5.0 9 3.9 3.9 480 82 43
700 700 10 8 3.8 4.1 7 3.0 3.2 527 90 35
700 700 1000 8 3.8 4.1 7 3.0 3.2 536 91 35
700 700 10,000 8 3.8 4.1 7 3.0 3.2 536 91 35

Note: D, specimen diameter. Source: Ref 10

select the resource alloy with production history as close as practi-
cal to that of the target material, most notably, distinctions be-
tween heat treated and non-heat-treated alloys. An illustration of
the degree to which relationships may vary with different fabrica-
tion histories is included in the data for five tempers of aluminum
alloy 2024 in Table 4.3, discussed in Section 4.2 in Chapter 4 of
this book.
Advantage of Having Multiple Source Alloys. The most reli-
able baseline relationships are those developed using multiple
source alloys for the type of alloy and temper represented by the

target alloy for which properties are to be estimated. The greater
the number of source alloys, the greater the dependability of the
relationships derived. There are times when only one source alloy
of suitable composition and temper/fabrication history is availa-
ble, and it may well be useful to make estimates for a comparable
target alloy based on the one source. However, in such circum-
stances, the resulting estimate will not be as reliable as if multiple
source alloys had been available.
Consistency of Source Data Patterns. In developing baseline
relationships, it is most useful to have consistent data for the mul-
tiple source alloys, that is, data for the same combinations of time
and temperature for each of the source alloys. For those tempera-
tures or exposure times at temperature for which data for one or
more of the source alloys are missing, the remaining data may
skew some points in the average relationships. The most reliable
relationships are those for which all source alloys are represented
by actual measured test data at all time-temperature conditions
being considered. For those time-temperature combinations for
which no data are available for one or more source alloys, some
adjustment may need to be made in the calculated percentage to
minimize the bias of the remaining source alloys. Graphical plot-
ting of the results of relational analysis assists in minimizing the
effects of missing data points.
Consistency of Test Procedures. In cases where the source al-
loys were tested in different laboratories, care must be taken to be
sure that other variables in the data have not been introduced by
differing test procedures used at the different labs. Ideally, all of
the source alloys will have been tested using the same practices,
those represented by ASTM E 139 (Ref 14), especially for varia-
bles such as yield strength offset and specimen gage length. How-
Chapter 2:Relational Analysis Procedures/13
ever, because the principal purpose of relational analysis is to note
changes with temperature, some variations in test procedures can
be tolerated.
Subjective Analysis. It is appropriate to note that some aspects
of the use of relational analysis rely on subjective analysis, for
example, whether data for specific alloys should or should nor be
averaged, or judging how best to deal with missing data points.
This means that different investigators may come to different con-
clusions using the same data for relational analyses. It is for this
reason that all of the raw data used in the analyses presented
herein are provided in the appendixes, with encouragement for
those interested to perform their own independent analyses.
Variability of Elongation Values. Because elongation values
tend to be much more variable than tensile strengths and yield
strengths, relational analysis is not as helpful in interpolating or
extrapolating those values to other alloys and tempers. For that
reason, the value of relational analysis for estimating elongation is
more limited than for estimates of tensile strength and tensile
yield strength. This does not minimize the value of relational anal-
ysis very significantly, because elongations are usually less impor-
tant in quantitative analyses of material performances. In cases
where elongation values were available for the alloys discussed
herein, they were included in the analysis, but little use is made of
the average relationships.
Lack of Adequate Resource. In some cases, there simply are
no suitable resource alloys that will enable the useful estimate of
the properties of a particular alloy. In those cases, there may be no
alternative but to begin testing. An illustration of such a problem
for an aluminum alloy is described in Section 3.2 in Chapter 3 of
this book.