Materials / Compare
FDM Polycarbonate vs. DMLS 316L Stainless Steel
Compare FDM Polycarbonate vs. DMLS 316L 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 | 530MPasourcetypical, as manufactured, horizontal |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 53.3MPasourcetypical, peak stress (= stress at yield) | 640MPasourcetypical, as manufactured, horizontal |
| Flexural strength | 89.4MPasourcetypical | not sourced |
| Elongation at break | 9.2%sourcetypical | 40%sourcetypical at break, as manufactured, horizontal |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 2.39GPasourcetypical | 185GPasourcetypical, as built, horizontal (XY); EOSINT M280-400W / M290-400W, 316L_Surface 1.0, 20 µm (2014 sheet) |
| Density | 1,180–1,200kg/m³sourcerange | 7,900kg/m³sourcepart density (ISO 3369, not labelled min or typical), EOS M 290, 40 µm FlexLine |
| Strength to weight | 44.8kN·m/kg | 67.1kN·m/kg50% higher |
| Stiffness to weight | 2.01MN·m/kg | 23.4MN·m/kg11.6x higher |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.38sourcebase material: polycarbonate family typical (Covestro Part and Mold Design guide, Table 3-1) | 0.3sourcebase material: austenitic stainless steels incl. 1.4404 (316L), design value |
| Shear modulus | 0.867GPa | 71.2GPa82x stiffer in shear |
| Bulk modulus | 3.33GPa | 154GPa |
| Speed of sound | 1,418m/s | 4,839m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 0.2W/m·Ksourcebase material: Covestro Makrolon 2405 injection-molding PC, typical, through-plane, 23 °C | 16.2W/m·Ksourcebase material: wrought 316/316L (Cleveland-Cliffs), at 100 °C |
| Thermal expansion | 65µm/m·Ksourcebase material: Covestro Makrolon 2405 injection-molding PC, typical, 23-55 °C, parallel | 15.7µm/m·Ksourcemean 25-100 °C, ASTM E228 |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 325µm growth | 78.6µm growth4.13x less |
| Specific heat | not sourced | 500J/kg·Ksourcebase material: wrought 316/316L (Cleveland-Cliffs), 0-100 °C |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | not sourced | 4.1mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 42.5W/m | 2,067W/m48.7x 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 316L (powder 9011-0032), EOS M 290, ParameterSet 316L 20µm Surface M290/400W, as manufactured, horizontal; ISO 6892-1 |
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 316L 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 316L Stainless Steel?
DMLS 316L Stainless Steel is stronger: its yield strength is 530 MPa against 53.3 MPa for FDM Polycarbonate (9.94x).
Which is lighter, FDM Polycarbonate or DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
FDM Polycarbonate is lighter: 1,190 kg/m³ against 7,900 kg/m³ for DMLS 316L Stainless Steel.
Which is stiffer, FDM Polycarbonate or DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
DMLS 316L Stainless Steel is stiffer: Young's modulus 185 GPa against 2.39 GPa for FDM Polycarbonate, so the same part in DMLS 316L Stainless Steel deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, FDM Polycarbonate or DMLS 316L 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 316L 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 316L Stainless Steel |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | 11.6x heavier | lighter |
| Stiff beam (bending) | 32% heavier | lighter |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 1.56x heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | 50% heavier | lighter |
| Strong beam | lighter | 44% heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 2.11x 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 316L Stainless Steel?
DMLS 316L Stainless Steel conducts heat better: 16.2 W/m·K against 0.2 W/m·K for FDM Polycarbonate.
Which expands less with temperature?
DMLS 316L Stainless Steel expands less: 15.7 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 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel AISI 1045
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel A992
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel AISI 1018