Chemical Composition Comparison

ElementC95200 (%)C95800 (%)Variation Significance
Copper81.5 – 84.578.0 – 82.0Nickel content difference
Aluminum8.5 – 10.58.5 – 10.5Identical range
Iron3.5 – 5.53.0 – 5.0Slight compositional variation
Nickel<1.04.0 – 6.0Key distinguishing factor
Manganese<1.0<1.0Consistent across alloys

Mechanical Performance Comparison

Performance IndicatorC95200C95800Performance Advantage
Tensile Strength490-580 MPa550-690 MPaC95800 Superior
Yield Strength240-340 MPa310-410 MPaC95800 Higher
Elongation15-25%12-20%C95200 Slightly Better
Hardness140-180 HB160-200 HBC95800 Harder

Application Domains Comparison

CriteriaC95200C95800
Primary IndustriesMarine Engineering, General MachineryOffshore, Naval, Chemical Processing
Corrosion ResistanceGoodExcellent
Environmental SuitabilityMild to ModerateHarsh, Corrosive Environments
Cost LevelBaseline20-30% Premium

Performance Characteristics Matrix

FeatureC95200C95800
MachinabilityExcellentGood
StrengthModerateHigh
Wear ResistanceGoodSuperior
Cost-EffectivenessHighModerate

Selection Criteria Decision Matrix

Selection FactorRecommend C95200Recommend C95800
Budget ConstraintsTight BudgetFlexible Budget
Performance RequirementsStandardExtreme
Corrosion EnvironmentMildSevere
Mechanical StressLow to ModerateHigh

Comparative Cost and Performance Index

Performance MetricC95200C95800Comparative Index
Relative Cost100%120-130%Cost Premium
Strength Index100125Performance Multiplier
Corrosion ResistanceGoodExcellentResistance Factor
Application VersatilityHighSpecializedAdaptability

Detailed Technical Conclusion

🔍 Key Insights:

  • C95200: Versatile, cost-effective aluminum bronze
  • C95800: High-performance nickel aluminum bronze
  • Selection depends on specific engineering requirements

Recommendation: Conduct comprehensive application-specific testing to validate alloy performance.