Materials / Compare
Copper C110 vs. FDM PAHT-CF
Compare Copper C110 vs. FDM PAHT-CF 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 | 69MPasourcetypical, 0.5% extension under load | not given (tensile used) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 221MPasourcetypical2.4x stronger | 92MPasourcetypical |
| Flexural strength | not sourced | 125MPasourcetypical |
| Elongation at break | 55%sourcetypical, 1 in. rod | 8.4%sourcetypical |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 117GPasourcetypical30.4x stiffer | 3.86GPasourcetypical |
| Density | 8,913kg/m³sourcenominal | 1,060kg/m³sourcetypical |
| Strength to weight | 7.74kN·m/kg | 86.8kN·m/kg11.2x higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 13.1MN·m/kg3.61x higher | 3.64MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.34sourcereference value at room temperature (Wieland-K32 = Cu-ETP = C11000, rolled products) | not sourced |
| Shear modulus | 43.7GPa | not sourced |
| Bulk modulus | 122GPa | not sourced |
| Speed of sound | 3,626m/s | 1,908m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 391W/m·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | not sourced |
| Thermal expansion | 16.9µm/m·Ksourcetypical, mean 20-100 °C | not sourced |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 84.5µm growth | not sourced |
| Specific heat | 385J/kg·Ksourcetypical, 20 °C | not sourced |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 114mm²/s | not sourced |
| Thermal shock resistance | 8,992W/m | not sourced |
| Melting point | 1,065–1,083°Csourcesolidus-liquidus | 225°Csourcetypical |
| Glass transition | not sourced | 70°Csourcetypical |
| Max service temperature | not sourced | 170°CsourceHDT 1.8 MPa |
| Values for | C11000 ETP copper, annealed to 0.050 mm grain size (OS050), 1 in. rod, copper.org typical values | Bambu Lab PAHT-CF, TDS V3.0, printed specimens X-Y, dry state; nozzle 290 °C, bed 100 °C, 100 mm/s, 100% infill; annealed and dried 80 °C for 12 h before testing. |
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 PAHT-CF is 3D printed: its properties depend on build direction and print settings; these are typical values.
Questions
Is Copper C110 stronger than FDM PAHT-CF?
FDM PAHT-CF is stronger: its tensile strength is 92 MPa against yield strength 69 MPa for Copper C110 (33%).
Which is lighter, Copper C110 or FDM PAHT-CF?
FDM PAHT-CF is lighter: 1,060 kg/m³ against 8,913 kg/m³ for Copper C110.
Which is stiffer, Copper C110 or FDM PAHT-CF?
Copper C110 is stiffer: Young's modulus 117 GPa against 3.86 GPa for FDM PAHT-CF, so the same part in Copper C110 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Copper C110 or FDM PAHT-CF?
For the same stiffness or strength: Copper C110 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension); FDM PAHT-CF is lighter for a stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate, strong rod or tie, strong beam, strong panel or plate.
| Part that must be | Copper C110 | FDM PAHT-CF |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 3.61x heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | 1.53x heavier | lighter |
| Stiff panel or plate | 2.7x heavier | lighter |
| Strong rod or tie | 11.2x heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | 10.2x heavier | lighter |
| Strong panel or plate | 9.71x 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).