Materials / Compare
FDM PAHT-CF vs. Zinc Zamak 3
Compare FDM PAHT-CF vs. Zinc Zamak 3 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) | 221MPasourcetypical |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 92MPasourcetypical | 283MPasourcetypical3.08x stronger |
| Flexural strength | 125MPasourcetypical | not sourced |
| Elongation at break | 8.4%sourcetypical | 10%sourcetypical, in 2 in. |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 3.86GPasourcetypical | 85.5GPasourcetypical22.2x stiffer |
| Density | 1,060kg/m³sourcetypical6.23x lighter | 6,600kg/m³sourcetypical |
| Strength to weight | 86.8kN·m/kg2.59x higher | 33.5kN·m/kg |
| Stiffness to weight | 3.64MN·m/kg | 13MN·m/kg3.56x higher |
| Poisson's ratio | not sourced | 0.27sourcetypical, Zamak 3 hot-chamber die cast |
| Shear modulus | not sourced | 33.7GPa |
| Bulk modulus | not sourced | 62GPa |
| Speed of sound | 1,908m/s | 3,599m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | not sourced | 113W/m·Ksourcetypical |
| Thermal expansion | not sourced | 27.4µm/m·Ksourcetypical |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | not sourced | 137µm growth |
| Specific heat | not sourced | 419J/kg·Ksourcetypical |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | not sourced | 40.9mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | not sourced | 7,782W/m |
| Melting point | 225°Csourcetypical | 381–387°Csourcemelting range |
| Glass transition | 70°Csourcetypical | not sourced |
| Max service temperature | 170°CsourceHDT 1.8 MPa | not sourced |
| 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. | Zamak 3 (ASTM B86 die cast), Nathan Trotter (zinc alloy producer) technical data sheet, typical values |
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 Zinc Zamak 3?
Zinc Zamak 3 is stronger: its yield strength is 221 MPa against tensile strength 92 MPa for FDM PAHT-CF (2.4x).
Which is lighter, FDM PAHT-CF or Zinc Zamak 3?
FDM PAHT-CF is lighter: 1,060 kg/m³ against 6,600 kg/m³ for Zinc Zamak 3.
Which is stiffer, FDM PAHT-CF or Zinc Zamak 3?
Zinc Zamak 3 is stiffer: Young's modulus 85.5 GPa against 3.86 GPa for FDM PAHT-CF, so the same part in Zinc Zamak 3 deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, FDM PAHT-CF or Zinc Zamak 3?
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; Zinc Zamak 3 is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension).
| Part that must be | FDM PAHT-CF | Zinc Zamak 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | 3.56x heavier | lighter |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 32% heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 2.22x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | lighter | 2.59x heavier |
| Strong beam | lighter | 3.47x heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 4.02x 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).