ISO 10993 biocompatibility<\/a> record that regulatory agencies require for long-term implantation.<\/span><\/p>\n2. Chemical Process Equipment Where Metal Corrodes<\/b><\/h3>\n
PEEK resists attack from virtually all organic solvents, dilute acids, and alkalis. It handles continuous service in environments that destroy 316L stainless steel \u2014 semiconductor wet bench components, pharmaceutical process equipment, and chemical analytical instruments. Where 316L requires replacement every 12\u201318 months due to chemical attack, PEEK parts run for 5\u201310+ years.<\/span><\/p>\n3. High-Temperature Electrical Insulation<\/b><\/h3>\n
PEEK has continuous service temperature of 260\u00b0C and excellent electrical insulation properties. For cable insulation, connector housings, and structural components in aerospace and electronics applications where both high temperature and electrical isolation are required \u2014 PEEK replaces higher-cost ceramic or metal components with the bonus of 60% weight reduction.<\/span><\/p>\n4. Weight-Critical Aerospace and UAV Structural Parts<\/b><\/h3>\n
PEEK’s density is 1.32 g\/cm\u00b3 vs 4.5 g\/cm\u00b3 for titanium and 7.9 g\/cm\u00b3 for stainless steel. A PEEK structural bracket weighs 29% of the equivalent titanium part. In weight-budgeted UAV structures and satellite components where every gram costs mission range, PEEK’s specific strength (strength-to-weight ratio) in unfilled grade competes with aluminium; CF30 PEEK competes with aluminium alloys in specific stiffness.<\/span><\/p>\n5. Food and Pharmaceutical Contact Applications<\/b><\/h3>\n
PEEK meets FDA 21 CFR 177.2415 food contact requirements without surface coating. Stainless steel requires electropolishing and passivation to meet sanitary requirements; PEEK requires only surface finishing. For pharmaceutical process equipment, PEEK’s chemical resistance and cleanability make it preferable to stainless in many wetted-part applications.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n
PEEK vs Metal Cost Comparison<\/b><\/h2>\n\n\n\n| Faktor<\/b><\/th>\n | Unfilled PEEK<\/b><\/th>\n | 316L Stainless<\/b><\/th>\n | Grade 5 Titanium<\/b><\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n\n\n| Raw material cost (per kg)<\/span><\/td>\n | $55\u2013$130\/kg<\/span><\/td>\n | $8\u2013$12\/kg<\/span><\/td>\n | $35\u2013$60\/kg<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Machining cost (relative)<\/span><\/td>\n | 1.5\u20132.0\u00d7 aluminium<\/span><\/td>\n | 3.0\u20135.0\u00d7 aluminium<\/span><\/td>\n | 4.0\u20136.0\u00d7 aluminium<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Tool cost per part<\/span><\/td>\n | Low (carbide, good life)<\/span><\/td>\n | Moderate (carbide, more wear)<\/span><\/td>\n | High (carbide, rapid wear)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Total part cost vs 316L (equal geometry)<\/span><\/td>\n | Similar to 20% more<\/span><\/td>\n | Ausgangswert<\/span><\/td>\n | 30\u201350% more than 316L<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Weight (1 dm\u00b3 volume)<\/span><\/td>\n | 1.32 kg<\/span><\/td>\n | 7.9 kg<\/span><\/td>\n | 4.5 kg<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Corrosion resistance<\/span><\/td>\n | Excellent \u2014 chemical resistant<\/span><\/td>\n | Good (Mo-enhanced)<\/span><\/td>\n | Excellent \u2014 passive layer<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Biocompatibility (implant)<\/span><\/td>\n | Excellent (ISO 10993 tested)<\/span><\/td>\n | Acceptable (temporary)<\/span><\/td>\n | Excellent (osseointegrates)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Max service temp<\/span><\/td>\n | 260\u00b0C continuous<\/span><\/td>\n | 870\u00b0C (austenitic)<\/span><\/td>\n | 315\u00b0C (Grade 5)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Radiolucency<\/span><\/td>\n | Yes \u2014 MRI\/X-ray transparent<\/span><\/td>\n | No \u2014 artefacts<\/span><\/td>\n | No \u2014 artefacts<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n <\/p>\n H\u00e4ufig gestellte Fragen<\/b><\/h2>\nIs PEEK stronger than aluminium for CNC machined parts?<\/b><\/h3>\nUnfilled PEEK (100 MPa tensile) is weaker than 6061-T6 aluminium (276 MPa) but stronger than most general-purpose engineering plastics. CF30 PEEK (200 MPa tensile) approaches 6061 aluminium in tensile strength. The correct comparison is not strength alone but specific strength (strength per unit weight) and the combined property set \u2014 no metal offers PEEK’s combination of radiolucency, biocompatibility, and chemical resistance at equivalent weight.<\/span><\/p>\nWhy does PEEK machining require annealing?<\/b><\/h3>\nPEEK stock contains internal residual stresses from the extrusion process. These stresses are released as material is removed during machining, causing the part to distort \u2014 often after it has been measured as in-tolerance in the chuck. Pre-machining annealing at 200\u2013250\u00b0C for 3\u20134 hours relieves these stresses before machining begins, producing dimensionally stable parts. Without annealing, PEEK parts with tight tolerances (\u00b10.05 mm or tighter) commonly fail after being removed from the fixture.<\/span><\/p>\nWhat tooling does PEEK machining require?<\/b><\/h3>\nUnfilled PEEK machines well with standard carbide tooling \u2014 positive rake angle, sharp cutting edge, and polished flutes to prevent chip adhesion. Glass-filled PEEK (GF30) requires coated carbide at minimum; PCD (polycrystalline diamond) tooling is strongly preferred and extends tool life by 10\u201320\u00d7 compared to carbide. Carbon-filled PEEK (CF30) requires PCD tooling \u2014 carbide end mills typically fail within 5\u201310 minutes of machining CF30.<\/span><\/p>\nHow much does PEEK CNC machining cost vs stainless steel?<\/b><\/h3>\nFor equal geometry, unfilled PEEK machined part cost is similar to 316L stainless or slightly higher \u2014 PEEK machines 1.5\u20132.0\u00d7 slower than aluminium, while stainless machines 3.0\u20135.0\u00d7 slower. The raw material cost differential (PEEK at $55\u2013$130\/kg vs 316L at $8\u2013$12\/kg) can significantly increase PEEK total cost on material-heavy geometries. For thin-walled, complex geometries where material cost is low and machining time dominates \u2014 PEEK and 316L total costs are often comparable.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n | | | | | | | | | |