Materials / Compare
FDM PAHT-CF vs. Stainless 316
Compare FDM PAHT-CF vs. Stainless 316 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) | 265MPasourcetypical (representative), annealed 1.0 mm sheet |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 92MPasourcetypical | 583MPasourcetypical (representative), annealed 1.0 mm sheet |
| Flexural strength | 125MPasourcetypical | not sourced |
| Elongation at break | 8.4%sourcetypical | 61%sourcetypical (representative), annealed, in 2 in. (51 mm) |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 3.86GPasourcetypical | 200GPasourcetypical, in tension |
| Density | 1,060kg/m³sourcetypical7.57x lighter | 8,027kg/m³sourcetypical |
| Strength to weight | 86.8kN·m/kg2.63x higher | 33kN·m/kg |
| Stiffness to weight | 3.64MN·m/kg | 24.9MN·m/kg6.84x higher |
| Poisson's ratio | not sourced | 0.3sourcedesign value (structural stainless steels) |
| Shear modulus | not sourced | 76.9GPa |
| Bulk modulus | not sourced | 167GPa |
| Speed of sound | 1,908m/s | 4,992m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | not sourced | 14.6W/m·Ksource20–100 °C |
| Thermal expansion | not sourced | 16.5µm/m·Ksourcemean, 20–100 °C |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | not sourced | 82.5µm growth |
| Specific heat | not sourced | 450J/kg·Ksourceat 20 °C |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | not sourced | 4.04mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | not sourced | 821W/m |
| Melting point | 225°Csourcetypical | 1,390–1,440°Csourcemelting range |
| Glass transition | 70°Csourcetypical | not sourced |
| Max service temperature | 170°CsourceHDT 1.8 MPa | 871–899°Csourceoxidation (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. | ATI 316 (UNS S31600), annealed 1.0 mm sheet, ATI technical data sheet (2012); 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 316?
Stainless 316 is stronger: its yield strength is 265 MPa against tensile strength 92 MPa for FDM PAHT-CF (2.88x).
Which is lighter, FDM PAHT-CF or Stainless 316?
FDM PAHT-CF is lighter: 1,060 kg/m³ against 8,027 kg/m³ for Stainless 316.
Which is stiffer, FDM PAHT-CF or Stainless 316?
Stainless 316 is stiffer: Young's modulus 200 GPa against 3.86 GPa for FDM PAHT-CF, so the same part in Stainless 316 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, FDM PAHT-CF or Stainless 316?
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 316 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension).
| Part that must be | FDM PAHT-CF | Stainless 316 |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | 6.84x heavier | lighter |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 5% heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 2.03x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | lighter | 2.63x heavier |
| Strong beam | lighter | 3.74x heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 4.46x 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).