Related Material — 56.3% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 (DIN 17200:1986) and GOST 4543 12HN3A (GOST 4543-2016) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Alloy Steel category.
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 is typically used for used in heavy-duty gears, crankshafts, aircraft parts, shafts, and connecting rods., while GOST 4543 12HN3A is commonly used for used for gears, pinions, crankshafts, aircraft parts, and transmission components..
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 is defined under Deutsches Institut fur Normung (DIN) (Germany).
As per chemical composition, DIN 17200 30NiCr11 vs GOST 4543 12HN3A is a 77% match.
As per mechanical properties, the match is 15%.
Combined, this makes them a related material overall at 56.3%.
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
DIN 17200 30NiCr11
GOST 4543 12HN3A
Tensile Strength
900-1100 MPa
850-1050 MPa
Yield Strength
700 MPa min
685 MPa min
Elongation
10-13%
11% min
Hardness
260-320 HB
58-62 HRC (case)
Typical Applications
DIN 17200 30NiCr11
Used in heavy-duty gears, crankshafts, aircraft parts, shafts, and connecting rods.
GOST 4543 12HN3A
Used for gears, pinions, crankshafts, aircraft parts, and transmission components.
Key Differences
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 specifies P, S which are not specified for GOST 4543 12HN3A.
Can DIN 17200 30NiCr11 Be Substituted With GOST 4543 12HN3A?
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 and GOST 4543 12HN3A 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.
What is the difference between DIN 17200 30NiCr11 and GOST 4543 12HN3A?
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 specifies P, S which are not specified for GOST 4543 12HN3A.
Can DIN 17200 30NiCr11 be substituted with GOST 4543 12HN3A?
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 and GOST 4543 12HN3A 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.