FabDigitFabDigit

HIPS vs SAN

Polymer · grade comparison

HIPS and SAN are both polymer grades. SAN is the stronger of the two: yield strength 70 MPa (10.2 ksi) against 24 MPa (3.48 ksi) for HIPS, about 192% more; tensile strength follows at 72 MPa (10.4 ksi) vs 26 MPa (3.77 ksi). In exchange, HIPS is the more ductile: elongation 40% versus 3% for SAN, and SAN is harder (84 Shore D vs 78 Shore D). SAN is stiffer (3.6 GPa vs 2 GPa) and SAN runs hotter in service (80°C vs 65°C continuous). On the shop floor, HIPS welds better (80 vs 70 out of 100) and HIPS sits in a lower cost tier (budget, $) than SAN (standard, $$).

HIPSChoose it when the part is bent, formed or impact-loaded, or when it will be welded.

SANChoose it when strength drives the design, or when the part sees heat.

HIPS vs SAN: properties

HIPSSAN

Mechanical

Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.

Elastic (Young's) Modulus

2 GPa0.29 Msi
3.6 GPa0.52 Msi

Shear Modulus

0.74 GPa0.11 Msi
1.3 GPa0.19 Msi

Bulk Modulus

2 GPa0.35 Msi
4 GPa0.58 Msi

Tensile Strength (Ultimate)

26 MPa3.8 ksi
72 MPa10.4 ksi

Yield Strength (0.2% offset)

24 MPa3.5 ksi
70 MPa10.2 ksi

Elongation at Break

40%
3%

Compressive Strength

45 MPa6.5 ksi
100 MPa14.5 ksi

Flexural Strength

42 MPa6.1 ksi
115 MPa16.7 ksi

Flexural Modulus

1.9 GPa0.28 Msi
3.7 GPa0.54 Msi

Fracture Toughness (K_IC)

2.2 MPa·√m2 ksi·√in
1.5 MPa·√m1.4 ksi·√in

Izod Impact, Notched

110 J/m2.1 ft·lbf/in
21 J/m0.39 ft·lbf/in

Hardness, Shore D

78 Shore D
84 Shore D

Hardness, Rockwell R

100 HRR
120 HRR

Compressive Modulus

—
3.5 GPa0.51 Msi

Shear Strength

—
45 MPa6.5 ksi

Hardness, Rockwell M

—
80 HRM

Same in both: Poisson's Ratio 0.35

Physical

Density and transition temperatures.

Density

1.05 g/cm³0.04 lb/in³
1.07 g/cm³0.04 lb/in³

Glass Transition (Tg)

100°C212 °F
106°C223 °F

Water Absorption (24 h)

0.07%
0.25%

Water Absorption (Saturation)

0.25%
0.9%

Refractive Index

—
1.571

Light Transmission

—
89%

Thermal

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

Thermal Conductivity

0.16 W/m·K0.09 BTU/hr·ft·°F
0.17 W/m·K0.1 BTU/hr·ft·°F

Specific Heat Capacity

1,400 J/kg·K0.33 BTU/lb·°F
1,350 J/kg·K0.32 BTU/lb·°F

Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)

80 µm/m·K44.4 µin/in·°F
70 µm/m·K38.9 µin/in·°F

Max Service Temperature (continuous)

65°C149 °F
80°C176 °F

Heat Deflection Temp. @ 0.45 MPa

84°C183 °F
100°C212 °F

Heat Deflection Temp. @ 1.8 MPa

76°C169 °F
90°C194 °F

Vicat Softening Point (B50)

97°C207 °F
105°C221 °F

Limiting Oxygen Index

18%
19%

Max Service Temperature (short-term)

85°C185 °F
95°C203 °F

Same in both: Min Service Temperature -30°C-22 °F

Electrical

Conductivity and insulation.

Dielectric Constant (1 MHz)

2.5
2.9

Dissipation Factor (1 MHz)

0.001
0.008

Same in both: Electrical Resistivity 1×10¹⁴ Ω·m3.94×10²¹ µΩ·in · Dielectric Strength 22 kV/mm559 V/mil · Volume Resistivity 1×10¹⁶ Ω·cm · Surface Resistivity 1×10¹⁵ Ω · Comparative Tracking Index (CTI) 600 V

Chemical & Environmental

Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).

UV / Weathering Resistance

18 / 100
32 / 100

Same in both: Corrosion Resistance 72 / 100

Manufacturability

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

Machinability

65 / 100
60 / 100

Weldability

80 / 100
70 / 100

Formability (cold)

88 / 100
45 / 100

Polishability

35 / 100
88 / 100

Melt Flow Rate

5 g/10 min
10 g/10 min

Processing Melt Temperature (typ.)

220°C428 °F
240°C464 °F

Mold Temperature (typ.)

40°C104 °F
65°C149 °F

Same in both: Mold Shrinkage 0.5%

Sustainability

Primary-production footprint per kilogram.

Embodied Energy (primary production)

92 MJ/kg39,553 BTU/lb
96 MJ/kg41,273 BTU/lb

Embodied Water

190 L/kg22.8 gal/lb
180 L/kg21.6 gal/lb

Typical Recycled Content

10%
0%

Same in both: Embodied Carbon (primary production) 3.5 kg CO₂/kg

Common Calculations

Ratios derived from the values above.

Specific Strength (UTS / density)

25 kN·m/kg
67 kN·m/kg

Specific Stiffness (E / density)

1.9 MN·m/kg
3.4 MN·m/kg

Modulus of Resilience

144 kJ/m³
681 kJ/m³

Same in both: Thermal Diffusivity 0.1 mm²/s · Thermal Shock Resistance Index 0

Strength versus weight

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

0.1110100123Density (g/cm³)Yield strength (MPa) — log scaleHIPSSAN

Manufacturing and finishing

CapabilityHIPSSAN
Default condition——
Relative cost$ Budget$$ Standard
Min. machined wall——
Best machined surface——

HIPS vs SAN — frequently asked

Is SAN stronger than HIPS?

Yes. SAN has a typical yield strength of 70 MPa (10.2 ksi) against 24 MPa (3.48 ksi) for HIPS — about 192% more. Tensile strength is 72 MPa (10.4 ksi) vs 26 MPa (3.77 ksi).

Which is cheaper, HIPS or SAN?

HIPS is the lower-cost material: it sits in the budget tier ($) while SAN is standard ($$). 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, HIPS or SAN?

HIPS, by a small margin. Both rate good for machinability — 65/100 against 60/100 for SAN; for welding the order is HIPS first (very good, 80/100) then SAN (very good, 70/100).

Ready to make it?

Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in HIPS and SAN 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.