Minimal Match — 35% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 (DIN 17200:1986) and IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 (IS 4367:1991) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Alloy Steel category.
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 is defined under Deutsches Institut fur Normung (DIN), originating from Germany, while IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS), originating from India.
As per chemical composition, DIN 17200 30NiCr11 vs IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 is a 62.6% match.
As per mechanical properties, the match is 0%.
Combined, this makes them a minimal match overall at 35%.
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
IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10
Tensile Strength
900-1100 MPa
410-590 MPa
Yield Strength
700 MPa min
245 MPa min
Elongation
10-13%
>=18%
Hardness
260-320 HB
Not specified
Izod Impact
Not specified
55 J min
Hardness (soft annealed)
Not specified
<=187 HB
Condition
Not specified
Normalised and tempered, ruling section up to 50 mm
Typical Applications
DIN 17200 30NiCr11
Used in heavy-duty gears, crankshafts, aircraft parts, shafts, and connecting rods.
IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10
Not documented
Key Differences
IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 specifies Mo which is not specified for DIN 17200 30NiCr11.
Can DIN 17200 30NiCr11 Be Substituted With IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10?
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 and IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 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 IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10?
IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 specifies Mo which is not specified for DIN 17200 30NiCr11.
Can DIN 17200 30NiCr11 be substituted with IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10?
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 and IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 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.