Minimal Match — 35% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 (DIN 17200:1986) and NF A35-565 100C6 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 NF A35-565 100C6 is commonly used for ball bearings, roller bearings, bearing races, rollers, precision tools, wear resistant parts.
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 is defined under Deutsches Institut fur Normung (DIN), originating from Germany, while NF A35-565 100C6 is defined under Association Francaise de Normalisation (NF), originating from France.
As per chemical composition, DIN 17200 30NiCr11 vs NF A35-565 100C6 is a 66.3% match.
As per mechanical properties, the match is 40%.
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
NF A35-565 100C6
Tensile Strength
900-1100 MPa
850-1100 MPa
Yield Strength
700 MPa min
Not specified
Elongation
10-13%
Not specified
Hardness
260-320 HB
60-66 HRC
Typical Applications
DIN 17200 30NiCr11
Used in heavy-duty gears, crankshafts, aircraft parts, shafts, and connecting rods.
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 specifies Ni which is not specified for NF A35-565 100C6.
Can DIN 17200 30NiCr11 Be Substituted With NF A35-565 100C6?
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 and NF A35-565 100C6 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 NF A35-565 100C6?
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 specifies Ni which is not specified for NF A35-565 100C6.
Can DIN 17200 30NiCr11 be substituted with NF A35-565 100C6?
DIN 17200 30NiCr11 and NF A35-565 100C6 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.