ESD filaments: interpreting surface resistivity and use conditions

What a surface resistivity figure on a datasheet actually describes

Fiberon PETG-ESD TDS V1.1 lists surface-resistivity values, in Ω, in an electrical-properties table. It says all data in the sheet come from printed specimens. The sheet provides material reference data; it does not describe measurement of a part printed in your workshop.

The product page attributes Fiberon PETG-ESD dissipation to carbon nanotubes. The TDS does not describe the microscopic mechanism inside an FDM part; it says the data come from printed specimens and that values may vary with printing conditions. A measurement should only be compared when its method and conditions are documented.

The datasheet also limits how its own numbers may be used. Its disclaimer says the typical values are for reference and comparison only, should not be used for design specifications or quality control, and may vary significantly with printing conditions. Read every line as a contextualized test result, never as a promise about your part.

Nozzle temperature: published results at 250, 270 and 290°C

For type 0°, the sheet lists (1.6 ±0.3)E+7 Ω at 250°C, (4.7 ±0.8)E+5 Ω at 270°C and below 1E+4 Ω at 290°C. Arithmetic comparison of the 250°C central value with the 290°C bound gives a ratio greater than 1600 for this specimen type. That observation does not automatically extend to other types or a personal part. The TDS recommended nozzle range is 250–290°C. Keep the upper-bound sign with the last value instead of treating it as an exact measurement of 10000 Ω.

The TDS reports separate results at three nozzle temperatures. It does not describe repeated measurements on the same spool and printer, nor explain the mechanism behind the difference. A sheet that gives one value without its conditions does not show where in the range it applies; record the actual temperature with any measurement.

Lower resistivity alone is not a better result for every application. Define the required criterion before selecting a printing condition. This grid does not predict the value obtained by changing your nozzle temperature, and the ESD name does not set a universal threshold for your object. Keep the published result, intended setting and any eventual part measurement as three separate records. A number lower than another in a datasheet is not by itself evidence that your assembly meets its use requirement.

Specimen orientation and the build protocol behind the table

The grid distinguishes specimen types 0°, 45° and 90°, illustrated with the tested surface in the manufacturer's diagram. At 250°C, the values are respectively (1.6 ±0.3)E+7, (7.0 ±0.9)E+6 and (8.8 ±0.8)E+6 Ω. At 270°C, they become (4.7 ±0.8)E+5, (3.4 ±1.2)E+5 and (3.2 ±1.0)E+5 Ω; at 290°C, all three are below 1E+4 Ω. These remain results for the illustrated types rather than qualification of every face of another geometry.

The general specimen-preparation section lists 290°C nozzle, 80°C bed, 100% infill, two shells, three top/bottom layers and cooling off. The electrical grid also has its own 250 and 270°C columns: preserve those specific temperatures instead of assigning 290°C to every result. This section does not detail the complete electrical method, instrument or measurement environment here. It therefore cannot establish that another laboratory procedure or another part geometry reproduces the reported electrical results.

When relating your process to these data, record geometry and setting differences without making them proven causes of an electrical difference. These documents do not isolate the effect of one wall, sparse infill or cooling on your part's resistivity. Comparing settings organizes the investigation; it does not replace the measurement method required for the application. A plausible printing explanation remains distinct from a measured cause under a controlled comparison.

Why a datasheet value is not a certified part

Do not label a part “ESD” based only on the filament name. Polymaker publishes typical values for a material and printed specimens, but does not certify your finished part. If a project has a requirement, identify the applicable standard or customer specification and evaluate the part under those conditions; the product page does not establish compliance.

The Polymaker site describes Fiberon PETG-ESD as suited to functional housings and precision components for electronics assembly. That is an intended-use statement from the manufacturer, not a declaration that your part will comply. The datasheet disclaimer reinforces this: each user is responsible for determining safety and technical suitability for the intended application, and end-use performance depends on part design, environmental conditions, and printing conditions as well as the material.

Keep published typical values, your printing process, and evaluation of the finished part separate. The TDS says its values are for reference and comparison, not design specifications or quality control; it also says the user must determine suitability for the application and disclaims a general fitness warranty.

Print settings, nozzle wear, and mechanical trade-offs

The TDS recommends a 250–290 °C nozzle, 70–80 °C bed, room-temperature chamber and cooling fan off. The product page recommends a hardened-steel nozzle to limit filler wear. These lines describe the product and its published conditions; they do not establish how every overhang or bridge will behave.

The TDS also reports different mechanical specimen results by orientation, including tensile properties. These are method- and specimen-specific values; they do not predict the strength of a particular part or rank all build orientations. The sheet lists HDT and Vicat values under their methods; neither is a universal service temperature.

The TDS lists drying at 65 °C for 3 h and an equilibrium absorption curve at 70% RH and 23 °C. These describe the grade and published conditions; by themselves they do not quantify how wet filament affects a printed part. Follow the manufacturer’s instructions and record drying.

Building a measurement record you can defend

To prepare a comparison record, we suggest noting filament reference, TDS version, lot, date and drying. This is an editorial traceability aid rather than a Polymaker qualification procedure or a sufficient checklist for every customer requirement. Since specifications can change, keep the actual document used with your notes rather than only the product name. The record should allow a later reader to distinguish published data from settings requested and results actually measured.

Add the setup, nozzle, temperature setpoint and available measurements, identifying each for what it is, then bed, infill, walls, top/bottom layers and cooling. Describe the actual geometry and tested surface, with method, instrument and test environment. An entered or displayed temperature alone does not establish the setup's thermal accuracy. Select the method and acceptance criterion from the requirement applicable to the project rather than treating this suggested record as a complete electrical qualification protocol.

If you measure a part or specimen, compare the result with the applicable requirement using a documented method. The TDS does not rank causes of a difference between your result and its values; it does not identify temperature, orientation or moisture as the “first suspect.” Distinguish published data from measurements actually taken.

Sources and limits

• PETG-ESD – Fiberon 3D Printing Filament by Polymaker
• Polymaker Fiberon — PETG-ESD technical data sheet V1.1

We organize manufacturer and community documentation; we have not measured these products ourselves. The manual for your exact model takes precedence over general guidance.