Materials / Compare
FDM Polycarbonate vs. DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel
Compare FDM Polycarbonate vs. DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel 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 | 53.3MPasourcetypical | 861MPasourcemean, as built, horizontal (N=72) |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 53.3MPasourcetypical, peak stress (= stress at yield) | 886MPasourcemean, as built, horizontal (N=72) |
| Flexural strength | 89.4MPasourcetypical | not sourced |
| Elongation at break | 9.2%sourcetypical | 19.9%sourcemean at break, as built, horizontal |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 2.39GPasourcetypical | 197GPasourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition H 900 (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Density | 1,180–1,200kg/m³sourcerange | 7,790kg/m³sourcemean part density (ISO 3369) |
| Strength to weight | 44.8kN·m/kg | 110kN·m/kg2.47x higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 2.01MN·m/kg | 25.3MN·m/kg12.6x higher |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.38sourcebase material: polycarbonate family typical (Covestro Part and Mold Design guide, Table 3-1) | 0.272sourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, all conditions (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Shear modulus | 0.867GPa | 77.4GPa89.3x stiffer in shear |
| Bulk modulus | 3.33GPa | 144GPa |
| Speed of sound | 1,418m/s | 5,029m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 0.2W/m·Ksourcebase material: Covestro Makrolon 2405 injection-molding PC, typical, through-plane, 23 °C | 17.9W/m·Ksourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition H 900, at 149 °C (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Thermal expansion | 65µm/m·Ksourcebase material: Covestro Makrolon 2405 injection-molding PC, typical, 23-55 °C, parallel | 10.4µm/m·Ksourcemean 25-100 °C, ASTM E228, AFTER atmospheric heat treatment (as-built value not published) |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 325µm growth | 52µm growth6.25x less |
| Specific heat | not sourced | 460J/kg·Ksourcebase material: wrought 17-4 PH, Condition A, 0-100 °C (Cleveland-Cliffs) |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | not sourced | 5mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 42.5W/m | 5,474W/m129x more resistant |
| Glass transition | 108°Csourcetypical | not sourced |
| Max service temperature | 105°CsourceHDT 0.455 MPa (printed specimens) | not sourced |
| Values for | 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. | EOS StainlessSteel 17-4PH IndustryLine (powder 9011-0041), EOS M 290, 40 µm, default job 17-4PH_040_StainlessM291_100, as built, horizontal; ISO 6892 & ASTM E8M |
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 and DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel are 3D printed: their properties depend on build direction and print settings; these are typical values.
Questions
Is FDM Polycarbonate stronger than DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is stronger: its yield strength is 861 MPa against 53.3 MPa for FDM Polycarbonate (16.1x).
Which is lighter, FDM Polycarbonate or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
FDM Polycarbonate is lighter: 1,190 kg/m³ against 7,790 kg/m³ for DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel.
Which is stiffer, FDM Polycarbonate or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is stiffer: Young's modulus 197 GPa against 2.39 GPa for FDM Polycarbonate, so the same part in DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, FDM Polycarbonate or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
For the same stiffness or strength: FDM Polycarbonate is lighter for a stiff panel or plate, strong beam, strong panel or plate; DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension), stiff beam (bending), strong rod or tie.
| Part that must be | FDM Polycarbonate | DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | 12.6x heavier | lighter |
| Stiff beam (bending) | 39% heavier | lighter |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 1.51x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | 2.47x heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | lighter | 2% heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 1.63x 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).
Which conducts heat better, FDM Polycarbonate or DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel conducts heat better: 17.9 W/m·K against 0.2 W/m·K for FDM Polycarbonate.
Which expands less with temperature?
DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel expands less: 10.4 µm/m·K against 65 µm/m·K for FDM Polycarbonate.
Among 59 materials
Related comparisons
- FDM Polycarbonate vs. Plastic Nylon
- FDM Polycarbonate vs. Plastic Polycarbonate
- FDM Polycarbonate vs. Plastic ABS (bulk/injection)
- FDM Polycarbonate vs. SLA Resin Standard
- DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel vs. Steel AISI 4340
- DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel vs. Nickel Inconel 718
- DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel vs. Stainless 17-4PH
- DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel vs. Steel AISI 1045