FabDigitFabDigit

CEM-3 vs G-9

Composite · grade comparison

CEM-3 and G-9 are both composite grades. G-9 is the stronger of the two: tensile strength 240 MPa (34.8 ksi) against 160 MPa (23.2 ksi) for CEM-3, about 50% more. CEM-3 is lighter (1.85 g/cm³ vs 1.95 g/cm³ for G-9) and G-9 is stiffer (19 GPa vs 15 GPa). On the shop floor, CEM-3 machines more easily (good vs poor) and CEM-3 sits in a lower cost tier (premium, $$$) than G-9 (high, $$$$).

CEM-3Choose it when weight is the constraint, or when the part is machined in volume.

G-9Choose it when strength drives the design, or when the part sees heat.

CEM-3 vs G-9: properties

CEM-3G-9

Mechanical

Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.

Elastic (Young's) Modulus

15 GPa2.2 Msi
19 GPa2.8 Msi

Shear Modulus

5.5 GPa0.8 Msi
—

Poisson's Ratio

0.19
0.16

Tensile Strength (Ultimate)

160 MPa23.2 ksi
240 MPa34.8 ksi

Elongation at Break

1.5%
—

Compressive Strength

320 MPa46.4 ksi
345 MPa50 ksi

Flexural Strength

300 MPa43.5 ksi
310 MPa45 ksi

Flexural Modulus

16 GPa2.3 Msi
18 GPa2.6 Msi

Shear Strength

90 MPa13.1 ksi
120 MPa17.4 ksi

Izod Impact, Notched

300 J/m5.6 ft·lbf/in
400 J/m7.5 ft·lbf/in

Hardness, Rockwell M

105 HRM
115 HRM

Compressive Modulus

—
15 GPa2.2 Msi

Physical

Density and transition temperatures.

Density

1.85 g/cm³0.07 lb/in³
1.95 g/cm³0.07 lb/in³

Glass Transition (Tg)

130°C266 °F
—

Water Absorption (24 h)

0.2%
0.8%

Water Absorption (Saturation)

0.45%
1.8%

Thermal

How each material carries heat and how hot it can run.

Thermal Conductivity

0.35 W/m·K0.2 BTU/hr·ft·°F
0.32 W/m·K0.18 BTU/hr·ft·°F

Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)

16 µm/m·K8.9 µin/in·°F
14 µm/m·K7.8 µin/in·°F

Max Service Temperature (continuous)

130°C266 °F
155°C311 °F

Min Service Temperature

-55°C-67 °F
-60°C-76 °F

Limiting Oxygen Index

32%
42%

Max Service Temperature (short-term)

260°C500 °F
200°C392 °F

Same in both: Specific Heat Capacity 1,100 J/kg·K0.26 BTU/lb·°F

Electrical

Conductivity and insulation.

Electrical Resistivity

1×10¹² Ω·m3.94×10¹⁹ µΩ·in
1×10¹¹ Ω·m3.94×10¹⁸ µΩ·in

Dielectric Strength

32 kV/mm813 V/mil
12 kV/mm305 V/mil

Dielectric Constant (1 MHz)

4.6
6.5

Dissipation Factor (1 MHz)

0.022
0.03

Volume Resistivity

1×10¹⁴ Ω·cm
1×10¹³ Ω·cm

Surface Resistivity

1×10¹³ Ω
1×10¹² Ω

Comparative Tracking Index (CTI)

200 V
600 V

Chemical & Environmental

Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).

Corrosion Resistance

85 / 100
70 / 100

UV / Weathering Resistance

40 / 100
45 / 100

Manufacturability

FabDigit workshop ratings (0–100 scores) — how each material behaves on the machine.

Machinability

65 / 100
30 / 100

Polishability

25 / 100
20 / 100

Sustainability

Primary-production footprint per kilogram.

Embodied Energy (primary production)

110 MJ/kg47,292 BTU/lb
100 MJ/kg42,992 BTU/lb

Embodied Carbon (primary production)

6.5 kg CO₂/kg
6 kg CO₂/kg

Same in both: Embodied Water 200 L/kg24 gal/lb · Typical Recycled Content 0%

Common Calculations

Ratios derived from the values above.

Specific Strength (UTS / density)

86 kN·m/kg
123 kN·m/kg

Specific Stiffness (E / density)

8.1 MN·m/kg
9.7 MN·m/kg

Thermal Diffusivity

0.2 mm²/s
0.1 mm²/s

Same in both: Thermal Shock Resistance Index 0

Strength versus weight

Yield strength against density for every composite grade in the FabDigit library; the compared grades are highlighted. Up and left is stronger for its weight.

1101001,000510Density (g/cm³)Yield strength (MPa) — log scale

Manufacturing and finishing

CapabilityCEM-3G-9
Default condition——
Relative cost$$$ Premium$$$$ High
Min. machined wall——
Best machined surface——

CEM-3 vs G-9 — frequently asked

Is G-9 stronger than CEM-3?

Yes. G-9 has a typical tensile strength of 240 MPa (34.8 ksi) against 160 MPa (23.2 ksi) for CEM-3 — about 50% more.

Which is cheaper, CEM-3 or G-9?

CEM-3 is the lower-cost material: it sits in the premium tier ($$$) while G-9 is high ($$$$). Part price depends far more on geometry, tolerance and quantity than on raw stock — upload a CAD file for a live quote.

Which is easier to machine, CEM-3 or G-9?

CEM-3. Its machinability rates good (65/100) against poor (30/100) for G-9.

Ready to make it?

Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in CEM-3 and G-9 side by side — material, machining time, tolerance and finish in one quote. Certified material data ships with the order on request.

Typical handbook values for the conditions named above, normalised for comparison. Hardness on non-Brinell scales is converted approximately for charting only. Request certified data with your order for design-critical properties.