Choosing the wrong material for your CNC project can cost you thousands in wasted parts and machine downtime. I've seen engineers rush into production with aluminum when they needed stainless steel's corrosion resistance, or specify exotic alloys when mild steel would perform just as well at a fraction of the cost.
CNC machining materials range from common metals like aluminum and steel to engineering plastics and exotic alloys. Your material choice directly impacts part performance, production cost, and manufacturing efficiency. This guide walks you through material properties, machinability ratings, and real-world selection criteria based on my years working with CNC machining operations.
Modern CNC machines can process an impressive range of materials. The CNC material list includes:
Aluminum Alloys: 6061 (general purpose), 7075 (high strength), 2024 (aerospace grade), 5052 (excellent weldability), 6082 (European standard)
Steel Variants: Mild steel (1018, 1020), carbon steel (1045, 1060), alloy steel (4140, 4340), tool steels (D2, O1, A2)
Stainless Steel Series: Austenitic (304, 316, 316L), martensitic (420, 440C), precipitation hardening (17-4 PH, 15-5 PH), duplex (2205, 2507)
Titanium Alloys: Grade 2 (commercially pure), Grade 5 (Ti-6Al-4V), Grade 23 (medical grade)
Copper Alloys: Pure copper (C11000), brass (C36000), bronze (C95400), beryllium copper (C17200)
Nickel-Based Alloys: Inconel 625, Inconel 718, Hastelloy C-276, Monel 400
Other Specialty Metals: Magnesium alloys (AZ31, AZ91), zinc alloys (Zamak 3, Zamak 5), tungsten, molybdenum
High-Performance Plastics: PEEK, PEI (Ultem), PPS, PAI (Torlon)
General Engineering Plastics: Acetal/POM (Delrin), Nylon 6/66, polycarbonate (PC), ABS, PET, PBT
Fluoropolymers: PTFE (Teflon), PVDF, FEP, PFA
Thermoplastics: Polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (HDPE, UHMWPE), polystyrene (PS)
Specialty Plastics: Polyethersulfone (PES), polysulfone (PSU), liquid crystal polymer (LCP)
Carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP)
Fiberglass reinforced plastics (G10, FR4, G7)
Aramid fiber composites (Kevlar)
Carbon fiber PEEK composites
Glass bead filled nylon
Wood and Wood Composites: Hardwoods, softwoods, plywood, MDF, bamboo
Foam Materials: Polyurethane foam, tooling foam, EPP foam
Graphite and Carbon: Graphite electrodes, carbon/graphite composites
Engineering Ceramics: Alumina ceramics (require specialized tooling), zirconia ceramics
Special Application Materials: Acrylic (PMMA), PVC, Corian solid surface
The key factor is whether the material can withstand cutting forces without excessive deflection or damage. According to data from the Manufacturing Technology Centre, over 73% of CNC operations work primarily with aluminum and steel variants due to their balance of machinability and performance.
Aerospace: Titanium alloys, 7075 aluminum, Inconel, carbon fiber composites
Medical Devices: 316L stainless steel, titanium Grade 23, PEEK, Ultem
Automotive: Aluminum 6061, mild steel, engineering plastics
Electronics: Aluminum, brass, FR4, polycarbonate
Mold Making: Tool steels (P20, H13, S7), aluminum (7075), copper alloys
Not every material suits CNC processes. You cannot effectively machine:
Extremely brittle materials like tempered glass that shatter under cutting forces
Very soft rubbers that compress rather than cut cleanly
Highly abrasive ceramics that destroy tooling faster than production justifies
Thermally sensitive polymers that melt at cutting temperatures
Materials with hardness exceeding HRC 65 typically require specialized grinding or EDM processes rather than conventional CNC machining.
The most frequently used materials in production environments are:
Aluminum 6061 dominates general-purpose applications. Its excellent machinability, good strength-to-weight ratio, and natural corrosion resistance make it ideal for everything from aerospace components to consumer products.
7075 aluminum offers higher tensile strength (83,000 psi vs 45,000 psi for 6061) when you need maximum performance. I specify 7075 for aircraft structural parts and high-stress automotive components.
Mild steel (1018) provides excellent machinability for structural components where extreme strength isn't critical. Its low carbon content makes it easy to weld and form.
Carbon steel grades like 1045 offer increased hardness and wear resistance. As carbon content rises, expect reduced machinability but improved part durability.
304 stainless serves food processing equipment and medical instruments where corrosion resistance is non-negotiable. 316 stainless adds molybdenum for enhanced chemical resistance in marine environments.
As Dr. James Wong from MIT's Department of Materials Science notes: "Material selection represents the single most impactful decision in product development—it affects every downstream manufacturing process and ultimately determines product success or failure."
Acetal (Delrin) machines beautifully and provides low friction for moving parts. PEEK withstands temperatures up to 480°F while maintaining dimensional stability, making it essential for aerospace and medical applications.
Machinability ratings help predict cutting efficiency and tool life. The scale uses free-machining brass at 100% as the baseline.
| Material | Machinability Rating | Key Characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| Free-cutting brass | 100% | Excellent chip formation, minimal tool wear |
| Aluminum 6061 | 90% | Fast cutting speeds, great surface finish |
| Mild steel (1018) | 70% | Good chip control, moderate speeds |
| 304 stainless steel | 45% | Work hardens, requires sharp tools |
| Titanium Ti-6Al-4V | 20% | High heat generation, slow feeds |
| Inconel 718 | 15% | Extremely challenging, rapid tool wear |
Aluminum 6061 ranks among the easiest metals for CNC milling. You can run cutting speeds 3-4 times faster than with steel, which directly reduces cycle time and cost. Its soft, ductile nature produces excellent surface finishes with minimal tool pressure.
Stainless steel presents moderate difficulty. The material work-hardens during cutting, so you need sharp tools and proper feeds to prevent surface hardening that dulls subsequent passes.
Tool wear patterns vary dramatically across materials:
Abrasive materials like carbon fiber composites contain reinforcing particles that act like sandpaper on cutting edges. Carbide tools last 200-300 parts in fiberglass versus 2,000+ parts in aluminum.
Work-hardening alloys such as Inconel or austenitic stainless steel create a hardened surface layer during cutting. Each subsequent pass encounters increasingly hard material, accelerating wear.
Heat generation affects tool life significantly. Titanium's low thermal conductivity (7 W/m·K) traps heat at the cutting edge, while aluminum's high conductivity (205 W/m·K) dissipates heat quickly. This explains why titanium requires slower speeds and frequent tool changes.
Data from Sandvik Coromant shows that switching from 304 stainless to aluminum 6061 can extend tool life by 400% while doubling production rates—a compelling case for material substitution when performance requirements allow.
Achieving precision tolerances depends on material stability and machinability:
Aluminum 6061: Low thermal expansion, minimal internal stress
Tool steels (pre-hardened): Dimensionally stable, predictable behavior
Brass: Excellent machinability, consistent chip formation
Plastics: Thermal expansion 5-10× greater than metals
Stainless steel: Work hardening creates dimensional drift
Long, thin parts in any material: Deflection during cutting
I consistently hold ±0.005 mm on aluminum parts under 150 mm length. The same tolerance becomes difficult with 304 stainless due to cutting forces that deflect the part and work hardening that changes dimensions as stress relieves.
For medical device components requiring ±0.01 mm, I specify pre-hardened tool steel or aluminum with rigid fixturing and climate-controlled machining environments.
This comparison appears in nearly every project discussion:
3× faster machining speeds
1/3 the material cost
Better thermal conductivity for heat dissipation
Easier to achieve surface finishes below Ra 0.8 μm
2-3× higher yield strength
Superior corrosion resistance in chemical environments
Better wear resistance for sliding contact
Maintains properties at elevated temperatures
According to the World Bank's manufacturing efficiency database, aluminum reduces total manufacturing cost by 40-60% compared to stainless steel when both materials meet functional requirements. However, stainless remains essential for food processing, marine hardware, and chemical processing where corrosion would compromise aluminum.
I use a simple decision matrix: If the part sees corrosive environments, high wear, or temperatures above 200°C, specify stainless steel. Otherwise, aluminum's cost and production advantages usually win.
Engineering plastics offer unique advantages over CNC metals:
Acetal (Delrin) machines like aluminum but weighs 1/7 as much. Its low friction coefficient (0.2) makes it ideal for gears, bushings, and sliding components. I've used Delrin extensively in mechanical equipment assemblies where metal-on-metal contact causes wear.
PEEK withstands repeated steam sterilization, making it the standard for reusable medical instruments. Its chemical resistance surpasses most metals, and it maintains dimensional stability across a 450°F temperature range.
Nylon (6/6) provides excellent impact resistance and fatigue life. However, it absorbs moisture (up to 2.5% by weight), which causes dimensional changes. Parts must be machined oversized and stabilized before final dimensions.
PTFE (Teflon) offers unmatched chemical resistance and the lowest friction coefficient (0.04) of any solid material. The downside? It's difficult to machine due to its soft, gummy texture that clogs tools.
When strength drives material selection:
Titanium Grade 5 (Ti-6Al-4V) delivers the best strength-to-weight ratio of any metallic material. At 130,000 psi tensile strength and half the weight of steel, it dominates aerospace structural components. The challenge? Machining costs run 5-8× higher than aluminum due to slow cutting speeds and rapid tool wear.
7075 Aluminum offers 83,000 psi tensile strength at aluminum's machinability advantages. I specify it for drone frames, bicycle components, and rock climbing equipment where every gram matters.
17-4 PH Stainless steel combines corrosion resistance with 190,000 psi yield strength after heat treatment. This precipitation-hardening alloy serves automotive valve components and chemical processing equipment.
Alloy steel 4140 provides 95,000 psi yield strength with excellent toughness. Pre-hardened variants machine reasonably well while offering wear resistance for gears, shafts, and tooling components.
The carbon fiber reinforced PEEK composite achieves tensile strengths exceeding 150 MPa while weighing 60% less than aluminum—but expect 10× the material cost and specialized tooling requirements.
Material selection impacts your budget through multiple channels:
Raw material price varies enormously. Per kilogram:
Mild steel: $2-3
Aluminum 6061: $8-12
304 stainless steel: $15-25
Titanium Grade 5: $50-80
PEEK: $150-200
Machining time multiplies with material difficulty. A part requiring 30 minutes in aluminum might need 90 minutes in stainless steel and 180 minutes in titanium. At $75/hour shop rates, this transforms a $37 aluminum part into a $225 titanium part before considering material costs.
Tool consumption adds hidden costs. Titanium and Inconel destroy carbide inserts 10-20× faster than aluminum. A production run of 100 parts might consume $50 in tooling for aluminum versus $800 for titanium.
Setup complexity increases with difficult materials. Stainless steel's work-hardening requires more rigid fixturing and slower feeds, extending setup time by 30-50%.
Research from the OECD manufacturing cost database shows that total part cost in titanium averages 8-12× the cost of equivalent aluminum parts when including all manufacturing factors—not just material price.
Volume changes the cost equation significantly:
For runs exceeding 1,000 parts:
Aluminum 6061 dominates cost-efficiency. Its fast cutting speeds, long tool life, and moderate material cost create the lowest per-part expense. Data from the U.S. Census Bureau's Annual Survey of Manufactures indicates that aluminum accounts for 43% of all CNC machining operations in high-volume production.
Mild steel 1018 serves structural components where aluminum's strength falls short. While slower to machine than aluminum, steel's lower raw material cost (70% less) and acceptable machinability make it economical for brackets, mounts, and frames.
Avoid in high volume:
Titanium and exotic alloys rarely justify their cost unless performance demands them. A single titanium component might cost more to produce than an entire aluminum assembly that meets the same functional requirements.
Stainless steel works for high-volume production when corrosion resistance is essential, but expect 2-3× the production cost of aluminum. Many manufacturers now specify aluminum with anodizing or powder coating to achieve corrosion protection at aluminum's production rates.
Cycle time differences can make or break production schedules:
Aluminum: 400-600 m/min cutting speed
Brass: 300-500 m/min
Mild steel: 150-250 m/min
Stainless steel: 80-150 m/min
Titanium: 50-100 m/min
Inconel: 30-60 m/min
A complex part requiring 2 hours in stainless steel might finish in 45 minutes using aluminum—a 62% time reduction. Over a production run of 500 parts, this saves 625 machine hours, which translates to weeks of capacity and tens of thousands in cost savings.
Thermal conductivity affects cycle time too. Aluminum's excellent heat dissipation allows aggressive cutting parameters without tool failure. Titanium's poor conductivity forces conservative speeds to prevent catastrophic tool failure from heat buildup.
According to research published by the Manufacturing Technology Centre, material selection accounts for 40-65% of total cycle time variance—more than toolpath optimization, machine selection, or operator skill combined.
Environmental exposure demands specific material properties:
316 stainless steel resists saltwater corrosion that destroys standard steel within months. Its molybdenum content (2-3%) creates a protective oxide layer even in chloride-rich environments. I've used 316 stainless for boat hardware that maintains finish and function after years of saltwater exposure.
Anodized aluminum provides excellent corrosion resistance at lower cost. Type III hard anodizing creates a 0.002-0.003" thick aluminum oxide layer that protects against most environmental conditions.
Aluminum alloys handle temperature swings from -40°F to 180°F without property degradation. Avoid plastics for outdoor use—UV radiation and temperature cycling cause embrittlement within 2-3 years.
Carbon steel requires protective coatings (powder coat, zinc plating) for outdoor use. Even minor coating damage allows rust to spread under the finish through crevice corrosion.
Most plastics fail outdoors. PEEK and acetal survive UV exposure, but expect surface degradation over time. Metals don't suffer UV damage, making them the default choice for long-term outdoor installations.
Medical device components face stringent biocompatibility and sterilization requirements:
Titanium Grade 5 (Ti-6Al-4V) and Grade 23 (ELI variant) dominate implantable devices. Their biocompatibility, corrosion resistance, and strength make them ideal for surgical screws, joint replacements, and dental implants. The material's osseointegration properties allow bone to bond directly to the titanium surface.
316L stainless steel serves temporary implants and surgical instruments. The "L" designation indicates low carbon content (≤0.03%) for improved corrosion resistance after welding.
17-4 PH stainless steel withstands repeated steam sterilization while maintaining edge sharpness for cutting instruments. I specify it for surgical scissors, forceps, and retractors that endure 500+ sterilization cycles.
PEEK replaces metal where radiolucency matters—it doesn't create artifacts in CT or MRI scans. Spinal fusion cages and surgical guides increasingly use PEEK to improve imaging and reduce patient discomfort.
Acetal and polycarbonate serve disposable instruments where cost matters more than reusability. These materials tolerate gamma sterilization and provide adequate strength for single-use applications at 1/10 the cost of stainless steel.
According to FDA medical device recall data, material-related failures account for less than 3% of device issues when proper material selection follows ISO 10993 biocompatibility guidelines.
After reviewing hundreds of failed projects, these mistakes appear repeatedly:
Over-specifying exotic materials: Engineers often specify titanium or Inconel when aluminum or stainless steel would perform adequately. A $500 titanium part that performs identically to a $50 aluminum part wastes money without improving product value. Perform a failure mode analysis before specifying expensive materials. If the part doesn't fail in testing with aluminum, don't use titanium.
Ignoring machinability: Specifying materials without considering production costs creates budget disasters. A part designed in Inconel might be impossible to produce profitably. Always consult with manufacturing engineers during material selection.
Inadequate surface treatment planning: Selecting carbon steel for corrosive environments without coating specifications guarantees premature failure. Material selection must include surface treatment requirements from the design phase.
Wrong plastic selection: Nylon's moisture absorption causes dimensional changes that ruin precision assemblies. PTFE's creep under load makes it unsuitable for structural applications despite excellent chemical resistance. Each plastic has specific limitations that designers must respect.
Mixing dissimilar metals: Galvanic corrosion destroys assemblies when dissimilar metals contact in the presence of electrolytes. Aluminum fasteners in stainless steel parts corrode rapidly. Always separate dissimilar metals with insulators or coatings.
As materials engineer Dr. Sarah Chen from Stanford notes: "The best material for a part is rarely the strongest or most exotic—it's the material that meets functional requirements at the lowest total cost of ownership."
Use aluminum unless you need corrosion resistance in harsh chemical environments, temperatures above 200°C, or yield strength exceeding 40,000 psi. Aluminum's 40-60% cost advantage makes it preferable when both materials meet requirements. Consider anodized aluminum as a middle ground—it provides enhanced corrosion protection at aluminum machining speeds.
Yes, but carbon fiber requires diamond-coated or carbide tools and produces abrasive dust that damages machine components. Expect tool life 1/10 that of aluminum and plan for frequent tool changes. The material's excellent strength-to-weight ratio justifies these challenges for aerospace and racing applications.
Three factors matter: adequate hardness to accept cutting forces without deforming, brittleness low enough to form chips rather than fracture, and thermal properties that allow heat dissipation without melting. Materials must also justify tool wear costs—extremely abrasive materials might be technically machinable but economically impractical.
Hardness correlates directly with tool wear and cycle time. Materials above HRC 45 require carbide or ceramic tools, slower cutting speeds, and more frequent tool changes. A part in hardened steel might cost 3-5× more to produce than the same part in mild steel due to extended cycle time and tooling consumption.
Material selection determines CNC project success more than any other single decision. Aluminum 6061 serves as the default choice for cost-effective production with good mechanical properties. Stainless steel grades provide corrosion resistance when environments demand it. Engineering plastics like PEEK and acetal reduce weight and offer chemical resistance unavailable in metals.
Consider these key factors: machinability affects production cost by 40-65%, material properties must exceed application requirements with adequate safety margins, and exotic materials rarely justify their cost unless performance absolutely demands them.
Start with functional requirements—strength, corrosion resistance, temperature limits, and wear characteristics. Then select the most machinable material meeting those requirements. This approach minimizes production cost while ensuring part reliability.
For complex material selection decisions, consult with your CNC machining partner early in the design phase. Their manufacturing experience helps identify cost-saving opportunities before committing to production tooling.
By continuing to use the site you agree to our privacy policy
