My theory with the Siraya filament rebrand is they were previously marketing it as PAHT-CF because that’s what all the big brands were selling, then when Bambu dropped PPA-CF for $150/kg, Siraya realized they were severely undermarketing their filament. It’s also worth noting that Siraya’s standard PPA-CF has equivalent carbon fiber content to Bambu’s PPA-CF (15-20%), while their PPA-CF Core has more CF (20-25%), but it’s concentrated in the middle of the filament.
I wish I knew whether 3D printing microplastic that end up in the air (as you can verify for yourself with a particle counter) can get absorbed through the lungs and end up in the brain. I presume that if they’re small enough, maybe they would? Anyway, from this perspective, maybe there is no safe filament at all. I don’t want to fearmonger, but I have a hunch that when the evidence gets developed, the true consequences of exposure for us in this hobby might be worse than most people currently think. How many plastic spoons can your brain hold?
It’s best to take as many precautions as possible. Every filament I print gets filtered before the air is exhausted. Multiple carbon filters and multiple hepa filters. Experimenting with potassium permanganate (nevermore scorch) mixed in with the carbon to get the higher temp stuff.
BBL PAHT CF’s tensil strength is at the range of <4000, SryT PPA’s tensile strength is at the range of <6500, BBL PPA-CF’s tensile strength is at the range of ~9000.
But in the meantime the SryT’s layer bonding is much better than BBL’s.
Bambu’s PPA CF is a different material, it contains “short cut” fibres, which is why it’s much stronger on XY but also much weaker on layer adhesion. Even if you print at 320C and highest chamber temp you can reach with H2D.
I believe BASF’s PAHT is a PA12 as well (but I only found one source that said it specifically). I didn’t find a lot of others that advertised it one way or the other, but I suspect there are more. I was annoyed that some stated specifically that it was a PA6 and called it low moisture absorbing (which is dishonest). Oddly these same companies didn’t show the wet/conditioned state in there TDS.
If you are trying to say PAHT doesn’t require it to be PA12, that is true too. PAHT can be just about amount any PA. The basis of the PAHT tag was simply higher temp PAs, however low moisture absorption was a point of the PAHT back down the line, and that is why I would mention PA12 higher on the list than PA6s. Not because Bambu says so. But yes… some companies call PA6, PA12, PA11, PA66, and PPAs all PAHTs. Which I don’t like.
I guess my stick is PA6s are not low moisture absorbing, but PAHTs are commonly marketed as low moisture absorbing. By the essence of what PAHTs are, high temp PAs, it would be accurate. However, many companies claim good moisture resistance and that just seems dishonest when talking about a PA6s and PA66s.
The bottomline, ambiguous terms like PAHT, create opportunity for things to get convoluted.
Yup PAHT does not mean anything beyond Nylon High Temp. It can be PA12, PA6+PA12 mix, PPA or any other mix of various different nylons. There is no standardization on the name, like with any filament you need to look at the TDS/MSDS to figure out exactly what is in it.
Dont know how I overlooked that ^^