I saw this before but didn’t notice that this one only uses 23 grams! I thought this would use a lot of material. I tried the Polymaker bell yesterday and it was way bigger. Do you know how this one compares? All the comments say it’s good 
1 Like
My comment on the tinny sound actually relates to the Polymaker bell. Definitely metallic. Just a bit tinny 
1 Like
You guys can easily scale it to whatever size you want in the slicer.
1 Like
Prices sure have fallen in the last 9 months:
Especially for the PPA-CF, the price is now way below even the Bambulab store sale price of $120/kg.
So is now an especially good time to buy?
The PPS-CF market rate is more in-line with the Bambulab sale price for PPS-CF.
1 Like
Are you american? If yes, buy a couple rolls. If no, hard to say. Price will probably depend on market adoption.
Just use a scraper with metal blade. Be careful not to damage the plate. This is what we use on a daily bases…
You can get it from AliExpress, print your own and just get metal blades and also get a fully machined one from BIQU
When i bought my H2C and a bunch of filament, i got 40% off on the pps cf, $77 for the 750g spool.
You can get 25% off any combo of 4 spools, so adding 3 spools of cheaper filaments ALMOST gets them for free (if bambu didn’t overcharge $23 for a kg of pla or petg).
polymaker still cheaper, at $98/kg, even with the 40% discount.
1 Like
We have a really big project going right now, and so far have made over 250 parts in PPS-CF. So maybe… we were partially responsible for the drop in their price. 
Looks like you timed your purchase well! I checked the same listing just now, and it’s back up to $270.
It’s a remarkable material.
1 Like
I’ve been down this rabbit hole for months . . . PPA . . . no PPS . . . NO PPA . . . now I’m back to PPS. the reasons are truly nuanced.
my application is a wireless sensor housing on a construction site. it must check all boxes. all. and the biggest weakness of all of these guys past ASA is UV resistance. First, carbon black is a decent but not magic UV protectant. that said, I’ve verified through chemical testing that Siraya’s PPA-GF indeed uses carbon black as the dye and, in my experience, lays down easier and with better surface finish than their PPA-CF. And at $48/kg, it’s really, REALLY hard to argue against.
When I did real research, there is a dearth of information on ACTUAL PPS-CF/PPS-GF UV testing, but I found a peer reviewed article that tested PPS-CF coupons to confirm the theoretical “PPS is better because aromatic” and the findings were interesting. First principles would suggest, more or less, that the aromatic properties might protect PPS for slightly longer than PPA, but in the end would succumb to the same type of UV-induced bulk degradation over time (again, dont quote me on that). however, what the actual testing showed, was that over the first 6 months of equivalent solar exposure, the PPS increased in strength due to UV-induced crystallization in the field. then, afterwards, the degradation over time only ended up being about 11% in tensile strength and sort of limited itself to the surface rather than complete bulk degradation. I apologize I dont have a reference – if you google this you will absolutely find the reference and others citing it. As an engineer making a part going into a crazy rugged environment, it is infinitely comforting to know that my part will get stronger in the hands of the customer rather than the other way around. The product is only really scoped for a 1 year lifetime, so this brought PPS-CF back from the dead, in my eyes.
PPS-CF/GF additionally have high HDT and fire retardancy, and PPS has one more extremely important property compared to PPA – a lower and completely stable (due to moisture resistance) RF dissipation factor. So anyone planning to use this in a housing with RF components, be sure to check the Df at your operation frequency. First off all, CF is much worse than GF because it forms a percolated, high aspect ratio carbon fiber network which is partially reflective and absorptive to RF. So GF is better than CF. Further, PPA is worse here than PPS. Even if you design around your higher PPA dissipation factor, you can’t get around the ~2x (at least at MY operating frequency – don’t quote me, but around that) change in Df after moisture uptake. The practical consequence here is that a PPA housing has the potential to detune or attenuate near-field RF signals, and the moisture variation makes the level of that detuning variable. Again, as an engineer needing to guarantee a particular RF range, knowing that what I ship in a PPS-based part will be stable is important. My research actually revealed that many connector RF bodies are made out of Virgin PPS for this reason.
So, for me, my choice ended up being (once I found a supplier with a good price) PPS-GF (with carbon black as colorant for better UV immunity). and for those paying attention – no, the carbon black (0.5-2% weight spherical nanoparticles) doesnt hurt the RF signal as much as the 10-30% high aspect carbon fiber in a -CF blend. so for the high heat resistance, ridiculous chemical resistance, initial strengthening in response to UV exposure, lower and stable RF dissipation factor, I went with PPS-GF for my application over the PPA composites.
One thing to note, is that not all PPA/PPS is created equal, and I do recommend trying different brands to see what you like. particularly with surface finish, strength, and color (when it matters for you)
Second, combination of printing temps and annealing strategies change things vastly. PPS-CF right out of the nozzle at 350C sparkles and is very clearly in a more crystalline form, which in my experience has obviated the need for annealing but makes for a finicky print (tends to warp more easily). Printing intentionally in the 320C range gives you a matte, semi-crystalline finish that lays down like butter and can be very, very reliable if printed slowly enough (which matters for production) but might mean you have to anneal to achieve the increased HDT/strength that the higher crystallinity gives you.
sorry for the long diatribe – I have infinite frustration that NONE of the common material comparison references talk about UV with any meaningful depth. We get it already – ASA is the best. but what if you need something better than ASA?
3 Likes
Interesting story!
You mention ASA for it’s UV resistance, but also mention that it has to tick all the other boxes.
You mention that GF is better handled than CF regarding RF signals, which seems to be one of the boxes also.
So what are all the boxes that have to be ticked if I may be so blunt to ask?
I don’t think that mechanical strength is a high requirement for your application so I was wondering why ASA was not possible?
1 Like
As it stands, I have a completely fabricated lot of about 20 ASA-CF housings ready to deploy because its a good all around bet (and I was able to source a killer multilateral package that ended up only about $5 per housing), but in the end we decided to first throw everything at it and then see where we might be able to step back.
I can’t get into the details exactly, but the device also has 2x 70lb magnets on it and will be stuck onto moving equipment, primarily a crane load but not limited to that. in simply attaching and removing the housing to the load, you have to put considerable force in multiple directions on the device. with the cover on there IS cross-support, but I could 100% see the ASA-CF cracking. Even the PA612-CF initial proof of concept module came back with puncture on the surface that moved me from 40% to 100% infill on the cover of whatever I choose
anyway, I love ASA-CF because you can’t beat the value proposition, but since this is a new market we’re going to go overboard and then economize later.
in fact, I also have a TPU-GF variant with an ASA sleeve for UV, because at the end of the day the requirements could swing 100% toward toughness.
1 Like
plus, uh, it goes “tink” . . .
1 Like
I hear you: there’s not a single filament that does everything. I wish there were.
Have you considered a 2K polyurethane coating like a SprayMax to get the UV resistance you’re looking for? Or possibly some kind of fire resistant ASA enclosure to go around your enclosure that you need to be UV-resistant? You could theoretically print the shell over your existing enclosure, and maybe with some clever interlocking ensure they hold together. Bambuslicer supports it. I proved it out here:
1 Like
on the 2k-urethane coating – absolutely, and still tossing it around.
and on the ASA enclosure over the enclosure – you read my mind. apologies for not explaining, but thats that I meant when I mentioned an ASA sleeve over the TPU-GF variant. its a literal sleeve with a flange on one end, simple as that. anyway, these are all incredible materials. there are also gems here and there like siraya’s black PET-GF, or IPCON’s PETG Metal or PC CF that have explicit UV stabilizers added. I just wish that was standard on, say the PPA composites or PPS composites.
in truth, I was ready to execute on the ASA-CF until my partner (who basically represents the client here) tried to impress upon me that multi-year UV resistance would be overkill here. in that conversation I was pushed toward the strongest materials, which I’m not opposed to. PPS-CF/GF just feels and looks super exotic to me, and it’s impressive to hand to a client and hear the metallic sounds that come out of it. the kicker is that once you stuff things inside a housing efficiently, that resonance is dampened to the point of non-existence, but the cover (which will only ever be opened to replace a wear-leveled SD card or bad battery) will tink when it hits the counter
I’m from Missouri when it comes to such things. I just last week tried Aerospace 300 over some fade prone orange traffic cones, and it appears to have had no meaningful effect: they’re fading quickly anyway under the intense UV of the unforgiving Texas sun. It makes me wonder how such a product can have such strongly positive reviews.
So, I’ll be coating them with Samurai 2K urethane, since it has the right signaling color, and see how that goes. In the past I tried a whole range of uv-blocking clear coats over solar cells that were coated in epoxy that was highly prone to UV damage, and out of all the things (other than glass), the one that stood out was the spraymax 2k clearcoat. If you don’t need clearcoat, though, I’d expect the results would be even better. It’s been proven out in the automotive world to work quite well.
Thick glass would certainly work, but it would also impair your RF signal.
I get it though. Coatings are another layer of hassle that one would rather avoid if it’s easy to do so. It adds time and cost and risk of things going wrong. Well, let us know what you decide on. The sleeve, or skin, sounds like it might be the easiest, after you’ve dialed it in.
I really do like the natural fire resistance of PPS. At least to my mind, it makes for a natural choice for electrical enclosures.