Materials / Compare
FDM PAHT-CF vs. Stainless 304
Compare FDM PAHT-CF vs. Stainless 304 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 | not given (tensile used) | 241MPasourcetypical, annealed, 70 °F (21 °C) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 92MPasourcetypical | 586MPasourcetypical, annealed, 70 °F (21 °C) |
| Flexural strength | 125MPasourcetypical | not sourced |
| Elongation at break | 8.4%sourcetypical | 55%sourcetypical, annealed, in 2 in. (50.8 mm) |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 3.86GPasourcetypical | 193GPasourcetypical, in tension |
| Density | 1,060kg/m³sourcetypical7.58x lighter | 8,030kg/m³sourcetypical |
| Strength to weight | 86.8kN·m/kg2.89x higher | 30kN·m/kg |
| Stiffness to weight | 3.64MN·m/kg | 24MN·m/kg6.6x higher |
| Poisson's ratio | not sourced | 0.3sourcedesign value (structural stainless steels) |
| Shear modulus | not sourced | 74.2GPa |
| Bulk modulus | not sourced | 161GPa |
| Speed of sound | 1,908m/s | 4,903m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | not sourced | 16.2W/m·Ksourceat 100 °C |
| Thermal expansion | not sourced | 16.9µm/m·Ksourcemean, 0–100 °C |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | not sourced | 84.5µm growth |
| Specific heat | not sourced | 500J/kg·Ksourcemean, 0–100 °C |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | not sourced | 4.03mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | not sourced | 838W/m |
| Melting point | 225°Csourcetypical | 1,399–1,454°Csourcemelting range |
| Glass transition | 70°Csourcetypical | not sourced |
| Max service temperature | 170°CsourceHDT 1.8 MPa | 899°Csourcecontinuous, oxidation (scaling) limit in air |
| Values for | 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. | Type 304, annealed flat-rolled (Cleveland-Cliffs 304/304L Product Data Bulletin, May 2021); Poisson's ratio from the Nickel Institute/SCI structural stainless design manual |
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 FDM PAHT-CF stronger than Stainless 304?
Stainless 304 is stronger: its yield strength is 241 MPa against tensile strength 92 MPa for FDM PAHT-CF (2.62x).
Which is lighter, FDM PAHT-CF or Stainless 304?
FDM PAHT-CF is lighter: 1,060 kg/m³ against 8,030 kg/m³ for Stainless 304.
Which is stiffer, FDM PAHT-CF or Stainless 304?
Stainless 304 is stiffer: Young's modulus 193 GPa against 3.86 GPa for FDM PAHT-CF, so the same part in Stainless 304 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, FDM PAHT-CF or Stainless 304?
For the same stiffness or strength: FDM PAHT-CF is lighter for a stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate, strong rod or tie, strong beam, strong panel or plate; Stainless 304 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension).
| Part that must be | FDM PAHT-CF | Stainless 304 |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | 6.6x heavier | lighter |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 7% heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 2.06x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | lighter | 2.89x heavier |
| Strong beam | lighter | 3.99x heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 4.68x heavier |
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).