Carbon Fiber Sheets (T300) | Industrial machinery protection | Lightweight (1.5 g/cm³ vs aluminum’s 2.7 g/cm³) | ▲ Reduces material costs; corrosion-resistant | Lower modulus (45 Msi) limits high-stress applications |
| General construction | High strength (3,400 MPa) | ▲▲ Superior to steel in weight-to-strength ratio | Tolerance: ±1.0 mm (suitable for non-precision tasks) |
Carbon Fiber Sheets (T800) | Aerospace components | Ultra-high modulus (55 Msi▲▲ vs T300) | ▲▲▲ Ideal for extreme stress (e.g., aircraft wings) | Higher cost (300% markup vs T300) |
| Precision engineering | Precision tolerance (±0.5 mm▲ vs T300) | ▲▲▲ Meets aerospace-grade dimensional stability | Requires specialized cutting tools |
Aluminum Alloy Sheets | Automotive parts | Moderate strength (500 MPa) | ▲ Low cost; easy to weld | 3x heavier than carbon fiber (2.7 g/cm³) |
| General fabrication | Moderate corrosion resistance (needs coating) | ▲ Widely available globally | Lower modulus (70 GPa▲▲▲ inferior to carbon fiber) |
Steel Plates | Structural support | High strength (550 MPa) | ▲▲▲ Unmatched durability in harsh environments | 5x heavier than carbon fiber (7.8 g/cm³)▲▲▲ |
| Heavy machinery | High modulus (200 GPa) | ▲▲▲ Resists deformation under heavy loads | Prone to rust; requires anti-corrosion treatments |
Plastic Composite Sheets | Insulation panels | Lightweight (1.2 g/cm³) | ▲ Cheapest material option | Low strength (200 MPa▲▲▲ inferior to carbon fiber) |
| Low-stress applications | Insulating properties (ASTM D1003) | ▲▲ Resists thermal expansion | Not suitable for load-bearing roles |
Industry Standard (Carbon Fiber) | High-performance composites | Standard modulus (40–50 Msi) | ▲ Matches T300 specs for basic industrial use | No advanced grades available in most markets |
| General industrial | Tolerance ±1.5 mm (ISO 3801) | ▲ Widely adopted in global manufacturing | Outperformed by T800 in precision and strength metrics |