ASTM A240/A240M S31025 vs IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2

Related Material — 56.8% match based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.

ASTM A240/A240M S31025 (ASTM A240/A240M:2025) and IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2 (IS 11169 (Part 1):2022) are both steel grades. ASTM A240/A240M S31025 is classified under Stainless Steel, while IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2 is classified under Alloy Steel — a different category, which is worth noting alongside the chemistry match below. ASTM A240/A240M S31025 is typically used for pressure vessels and general applications (plate, sheet and strip), while IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2 is commonly used for cold heading and cold extrusion of parts that are quenched and tempered; the standard covers bars, wire rods and wires of 2 to 100 mm (clause 1.1, annex c). ASTM A240/A240M S31025 is defined under ASTM International, originating from United States, while IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2 is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS), originating from India.

As per chemical composition, ASTM A240/A240M S31025 vs IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2 is a 35.2% match. As per mechanical properties, the match is 100%. Combined, this makes them a related material overall at 56.8%.

Frequently Compared With ASTM A240/A240M S31025:
IS 1570 (Part 7) 12Cr12MoVH GOST 5632 08X18H10 EN 10088-1 1.4006 EN 10088-1 1.4845 EN 10088-1 1.4301 EN 10088-1 1.4401 IS 1570 (Part 7) 12Cr12MoH IS 1570 (Part 7) 12Cr12Ni2Mo ASTM A959 .- GOST 5632 06Kh23N28 IS 1570 (Part 7) 12Cr13H GB/T 3280 06Cr19Ni10
Match Breakdown
CHEMISTRY MATCH
35.2%
MECHANICAL MATCH
100%
OVERALL
56.8%
Specifications
Property ASTM A240/A240M S31025 IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2
Standard ASTM A240/A240M:2025 IS 11169 (Part 1):2022
Category Stainless Steel Alloy Steel
C (%) <=0.10 0.37-0.44
Mn (%) <=1.50 0.70-1.00
P (%) <=0.030 <=0.025
S (%) <=0.030 <=0.025
Si (%) <=1.00 <=0.30
Cr (%) 19.5-23.0 0.40-0.60
Ni (%) 23.0-26.0 0.40-0.70
Mo (%) 1.0-2.0 0.15-0.30
N (%) 0.10-0.25 Not specified
Nb (%) 0.10-0.40 Not specified
Ti (%) <=0.20 Not specified
B (%) 0.002-0.010 Not specified
Cu (%) Not specified <=0.25
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property ASTM A240/A240M S31025 IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2
Tensile Strength >=640 MPa Not specified
Yield Strength >=270 MPa Not specified
Elongation >=30% Not specified
Hardness <=256 HB Not specified
Condition Plate, sheet and strip; yield by 0.2 percent offset Not specified
Tensile Strength, annealed, cold drawn and annealed (+AC+C+AC) Not specified <=640 MPa (over 5 to 40 mm)
Typical Applications
ASTM A240/A240M S31025
Pressure vessels and general applications (plate, sheet and strip)
IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2
Cold heading and cold extrusion of parts that are quenched and tempered; the standard covers bars, wire rods and wires of 2 to 100 mm (clause 1.1, Annex C)
Key Differences
Can ASTM A240/A240M S31025 Be Substituted With IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2?
ASTM A240/A240M S31025 and IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2 share some compositional similarity but differ enough that substitution should not be assumed. Review the differences above carefully, and consult the applicable standard or a metallurgist before using one in place of the other.
On M-EX Right Now
ASTM A240/A240M S31025
0 active listings and RFQs →
IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2
0 active listings and RFQs →
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between ASTM A240/A240M S31025 and IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2?
Different category: ASTM A240/A240M S31025 is Stainless Steel, IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2 is Alloy Steel. ASTM A240/A240M S31025 specifies N, Nb, Ti, B which are not specified for IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2. IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2 specifies Cu which is not specified for ASTM A240/A240M S31025.
Can ASTM A240/A240M S31025 be substituted with IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2?
ASTM A240/A240M S31025 and IS 11169 (Part 1) 41Cr2Ni2Mo2 share some compositional similarity but differ enough that substitution should not be assumed. Review the differences above carefully, and consult the applicable standard or a metallurgist before using one in place of the other.