Materials / Compare
Aluminum A380 vs. FDM Polycarbonate
Compare Aluminum A380 vs. FDM Polycarbonate strength, stiffness, weight and thermal properties.
| Try it on a partA bracket to run stress or thermal on, free in your browser | Open in LessCAD | Open in LessCAD |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanical | ||
| Yield strength | 160MPasourcetypical, 25 °C | 53.3MPasourcetypical |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 320MPasourcetypical, 25 °C | 53.3MPasourcetypical, peak stress (= stress at yield) |
| Flexural strength | not sourced | 89.4MPasourcetypical |
| Elongation at break | 3.5%sourcetypical | 9.2%sourcetypical2.63x more ductile |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 71GPasourcetypical, 25 °C | 2.39GPasourcetypical |
| Density | 2,713kg/m³sourcetypical at 68 °F | 1,180–1,200kg/m³sourcerange |
| Strength to weight | 59kN·m/kg32% higher | 44.8kN·m/kg |
| Stiffness to weight | 26.2MN·m/kg13x higher | 2.01MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | not sourced | 0.38sourcebase material: polycarbonate family typical (Covestro Part and Mold Design guide, Table 3-1) |
| Shear modulus | not sourced | 0.867GPa |
| Bulk modulus | not sourced | 3.33GPa |
| Speed of sound | 5,116m/s | 1,418m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 96.2W/m·Ksourcetypical at 68 °F | 0.2W/m·Ksourcebase material: Covestro Makrolon 2405 injection-molding PC, typical, through-plane, 23 °C |
| Thermal expansion | 21.8µm/m·Ksourcetypical, 68-572 °F (20-300 °C) | 65µm/m·Ksourcebase material: Covestro Makrolon 2405 injection-molding PC, typical, 23-55 °C, parallel |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 109µm growth2.98x less | 325µm growth |
| Specific heat | 963J/kg·Ksourcetypical at 68 °F | not sourced |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 36.8mm²/s | not sourced |
| Thermal shock resistance | not sourced | 42.5W/m |
| Glass transition | not sourced | 108°Csourcetypical |
| Max service temperature | not sourced | 105°CsourceHDT 0.455 MPa (printed specimens) |
| Values for | A380 aluminium high-pressure die-casting alloy, typical properties; Rheocast Company (aluminium die caster, Germantown WI) A380 alloy data page. | Ultimaker PC, 3D-printed specimens, XY (flat); Ultimaker S5 Pro, engineering intent profile, 0.15 mm layer height, AA 0.4 print core, 100% infill, Cura 4.9, printed one-at-a-time, conditioned >=24 h at room temperature. TDS (file v5.00), April 20, 2022. |
Every value links to the document that states it. "Not sourced" means no citable source states it (or only a specification minimum); figures computed from it are left out too.
FDM Polycarbonate is 3D printed: its properties depend on build direction and print settings; these are typical values.
Questions
Is Aluminum A380 stronger than FDM Polycarbonate?
Aluminum A380 is stronger: its yield strength is 160 MPa against 53.3 MPa for FDM Polycarbonate (3x).
Which is lighter, Aluminum A380 or FDM Polycarbonate?
FDM Polycarbonate is lighter: 1,190 kg/m³ against 2,713 kg/m³ for Aluminum A380.
Which is stiffer, Aluminum A380 or FDM Polycarbonate?
Aluminum A380 is stiffer: Young's modulus 71 GPa against 2.39 GPa for FDM Polycarbonate, so the same part in Aluminum A380 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Aluminum A380 or FDM Polycarbonate?
For the same stiffness or strength: Aluminum A380 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension), stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate, strong rod or tie; FDM Polycarbonate is lighter for a strong beam, strong panel or plate.
| Part that must be | Aluminum A380 | FDM Polycarbonate |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 13x heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 2.39x heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 36% heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | lighter | 32% heavier |
| Strong beam | 10% heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | 32% heavier | lighter |
For the same stiffness or strength, mass scales with density over stiffness (or strength) raised to a power set by how the part is loaded: 1 for a rod in tension, 1/2 for a beam in bending, 1/3 for a panel (the standard material-selection indices).
Which is more ductile, Aluminum A380 or FDM Polycarbonate?
FDM Polycarbonate stretches further before it breaks: 9.2% elongation at break against 3.5% for Aluminum A380.
Which conducts heat better, Aluminum A380 or FDM Polycarbonate?
Aluminum A380 conducts heat better: 96.2 W/m·K against 0.2 W/m·K for FDM Polycarbonate.
Which expands less with temperature?
Aluminum A380 expands less: 21.8 µm/m·K against 65 µm/m·K for FDM Polycarbonate.