SLS vs MJF Nylons in 3D Printing: An In-depth Comparison

Comparing SLS Nylon to MJF Nylon in 3D Printing: Breaking Down the Differences

Currently, there are two notable nylon materials used in 3D printing - SLS nylon, which is based on SLS 3D printing, and HP nylon derived from HP's MJF technique. Let's delve into how these two prevalent nylon materials differentiate and how they are related.

Nylon pa12 3D printing material

SLS Nylon versus MJF Nylon: A Closer Look

Both Multi Jet Fusion (MJF) and Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) are powder bed-based 3D printing methods, using SLS and MJF nylon respectively. They commence with a powder foundation layered onto the print bed, building parts by either sintering or fusing these particles layer by layer. Their primary distinction is their source of heat: SLS employs lasers, while MJF utilizes an infrared-absorbing ink sprayed onto the powder bed, which is then fused using an infrared heat source.
HP MJF 3D Printer

On a general scale, the nylon varieties share comparable properties. However, variations in processes, precision, material types, costs, and delivery durations do exist. Here's a detailed breakdown:

The Printing Processes

● SLS Method: Starts by uniformly spreading a powder layer on the formation platform and pre-heating it to near sintering temperatures. Lasers then sinter the powder according to a set pattern, moving the platform down layer-by-layer until completion. Once done, cooling is necessary before part extraction.
● MJF Method: Like SLS, it begins by spreading powder on the formation platform and heating it. The main variance is the carriage equipped with inkjet nozzles that traverse over the powder, spraying fusion agents and detailing agents. An infrared heat source then sinters the sprayed sections. As with SLS, cooling is mandatory before removing the printed parts.

Speed and Post-Printing Steps

MJF stands out in terms of faster cooling and post-processing, courtesy of HP's specialized post-treatment station. Additionally, MJF reclaims 80-85% of its used powder, whereas SLS recycles just about 50%. This efficiency, coupled with quicker cooling, makes MJF more agile in production cycles, potentially reducing costs.

Dimensional Precision

MJF slightly edges out SLS when it comes to precision, largely due to its 1200 DPI printing head, as opposed to SLS's typical 0.3-0.4mm laser diameter. However, both techniques excel in delivering industrial-grade prints and share similar challenges, such as potential warping.

	MJF	SLS
Dimensional accuracy	±0.3% (with lower limit on ±0.2 mm)	± 0.3% (lower limit of ± 0.3 mm)
Typical build size	380 × 285 × 380mm	160x160x300m
Common layer thickness	70- 100 microns	100-120 microns
Minimum wall thickness*	0.6 mm	0.7 mm
Minimum detail	0.25 mm	0.30 mm

Visual Appeal and Texture

MJF and SLS PA material exhibit a light-gray and it also can be dyed in black. Before dyeing, you may need to pre-process the surface of the PA12 part. This can involve sanding, polishing, or using special surface treatments to enhance dye absorption and adhesion. Dissolve the dye in an appropriate solvent to create a dye solution. Then, immerse the PA12 part to be dyed into the dye solution, ensuring that the entire part is fully wetted. After immersion, remove the part and fix the dye under suitable conditions. This may involve using a heat source, UV curing, or other methods.

Material Attributes
Both predominantly use PA 12 (nylon). SLS parts tend to have directionally weaker printing results (z-direction), while MJF offers uniformly impressive mechanical properties. SLS, being a mature system, has extensive documentation. In contrast, MJF's materials, despite being superior, are yet to gain widespread recognition.

	HP PA 12	SLS PA 12
Tensile Strength	XY: 48 MPa Z: 48 MPa	XY: 48 MPa Z: 42 MPa
Tensile Modulus	XY: 1700 MPa Z: 1800 MPa	XY: 1650 MPa Z: 1650 MPa
Elongation at break	XY: 20% Z: 15%	XY: 18% Z: 4%

Price and Turnaround Time

>> C ontact 3DPlink for price and delivery