Public engineering report

Prusa3D Prusament PC Blend PC Black

Material Engineering Report
MaterialID MAT0033
3DPIceland Engineering Platform
3DPIceland Labs
Generated with 3DPIceland Engineering Platform v60.0.6 WORKFLOW-RELIABILITY - Bug Fixes and Workflow Reliability
Generated 2026-08-25 19:02:26
Public-data contract: This static report contains only allowlisted material identity, public links, canonical MSRP and existing Verified Material Summary / governed score outputs. It excludes raw specimen rows and non-public operational data.
Test coverage
Complete
Engineering axes
6/6
Public MSRP
$49.78 USD/kg

Material identity

MaterialIDMAT0033
MaterialPrusa3D Prusament PC Blend PC Black
ManufacturerPrusa3D
Product linePrusament
Base materialPC
CategoryEngineering
Variant / finish
Reinforcement
ColorBlack

Governed engineering profile

Overall56/100
Tensile39/100
Impact46/100
Stiffness68/100
Consistency87/100
Layer adhesion40/100
Thermal47/100
Best available axisconsistency

Engineering score profile

Overall
56/100
Tensile
39/100
Impact
46/100
Stiffness
68/100
Consistency
87/100
Layer adhesion
40/100
Thermal
47/100

Engineering radar

TensileImpactStiffnessThermalLayer adhesionConsistency
Selected material
Material average - PC
Manufacturer average - Prusa3D

All axes use existing governed 0–100 engineering scores. Missing axes are shown at zero and remain listed as n/a elsewhere in the report.

Fixture thermal result

93 °C · score 47/100 · method 3dp-thermal-deflection-fixture-v1
Nearby BlueDOT probe-indicated fixture temperature from a non-standard comparative 3DPIceland method; not ASTM D648, ISO 75, specimen temperature, certified HDT or a manufacturer limit.

Material and manufacturer context

MetricSelected materialMaterial averageManufacturer average
Overall56/10046/10049/100
Tensile39/10030/10031/100
Impact46/10026/10021/100
Stiffness68/10082/10084/100
Consistency87/10075/10079/100
Layer adhesion40/10019/10032/100
Thermal47/100

Verified measurement results

Existing Verified Material Summary outputs. The public renderer does not read raw specimen rows or recalculate these values.

MeasurementAverageStd. deviationCVSamplesConfidence
Tensile upright17.673 MPa3.075 MPa17.4%1010/10
Tensile flat43.928 MPa1.09 MPa2.5%1010/10
Impact upright61.026 kJ/m²7.986 kJ/m²13.1%1010/10
Impact flat855.617 kJ/m²164.425 kJ/m²19.2%1010/10
Stiffness modulus2038.809 MPa
Stiffness deflection2.662 mm

Measurement provenance

Canonical per-module measured dates from SQLite, shown in unambiguous ISO format. Missing dates are not inferred.

ModuleMeasured date
TensileNot recorded
ImpactNot recorded
StiffnessNot recorded
ThermalNot recorded

Engineering interpretation

Summary: Prusa3D Prusament PC Blend PC Black has a balanced mid-range engineering profile. It is above its material-family average by 9,4 points and above its manufacturer average by 6,5 points. Its strongest measured axis is Consistency, while the weakest axis is Tensile.
Data-driven review: Prusa3D Prusament PC Blend PC Black is best understood as a balanced material for general functional prototypes. Compared with the current verified dataset, it ranks better than 89% overall, is above the material-family average by 9,4 points, and is above the manufacturer average by 6,5 points. Its strongest engineering signal is Consistency, while Tensile is the main limitation to consider before using it for demanding applications.
Best feature
Consistency
Main limitation
Tensile
Dataset position
Better than 89%
26 / 234

Strengths

  • Layer adhesion: 40/100. Z-axis bonding is better than the material-family context.
  • Consistency: 87/100. Repeatability is one of the stronger signals in this material profile.
  • Impact: 46/100. Impact behavior is competitive against the material-family context.
  • Tensile: 39/100. Tensile behavior is competitive against the material-family context.

Limitations

  • Tensile: 39/100. Avoid using this as the primary choice for tensile-loaded parts.
  • Stiffness: 68/100. Expect less shape stability than the stronger materials in the same family.

Engineering trade-offs

  • Good repeatability does not compensate for low tensile capability in load-bearing designs.

Recommended applications

  • Repeatable print jobs and production-style batches

Metric rankings and percentiles

MetricScoreRankPercentile
Overall56/10026 / 234Better than 89%
Tensile39/10019 / 226Better than 92%
Impact46/10037 / 226Better than 84%
Stiffness68/100155 / 223Better than 31%
Consistency87/1009 / 231Better than 97%
Layer adhesion40/10048 / 226Better than 79%
Thermal47/10020 / 209Better than 91%

Decision guidance

Better alternatives

MaterialIDMaterialManufacturerOverallTensileImpact
No stronger same-base-material alternatives were identified in the current governed dataset.

Peer context

Highest-scoring same-base-material peers from the current governed dataset. This context is descriptive and is not recalculated by the public renderer.

MaterialIDMaterialManufacturerOverallTensileImpact
MAT0029Prusa3D Prusament PC Blend PC CF BlackPrusa3D55/10035/10032/100
MAT0032Prima Creator PrimaSelect PC BlackPrima Creator46/10026/10021/100
MAT0028Prima Creator PrimaSelect PC CF BlackPrima Creator45/10038/10021/100
MAT0168BambuLab Basic PC WhiteBambuLab42/10030/10013/100
MAT0034Yasin Standard Black PC Plus BlackYasin35/10012/10021/100

Public links

Methodology and limitations

Results are comparative 3DPIceland measurements from home-built test equipment. Thermal is a nearby BlueDOT probe-indicated fixture temperature, not ASTM D648, ISO 75 or specimen temperature. Missing evidence remains n/a. Scores and test results are not recalculated by this publishing layer and do not replace certified manufacturer datasheets or accredited laboratory testing.