Related Material — 69.9% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
EN 10088-1 X1CrNi25-21 (EN 10088-1:2014) and ASTM A240/A240M S31050 (ASTM A240/A240M:2025) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Stainless Steel category.
EN 10088-1 X1CrNi25-21 is defined under European Standard (EN), originating from Europe, while ASTM A240/A240M S31050 is defined under ASTM International, originating from United States.
As per chemical composition, EN 10088-1 X1CrNi25-21 vs ASTM A240/A240M S31050 is a 78.5% match.
Mechanical property data is not available for both grades, so this factor could not be scored.
Combined, this makes them a related material overall at 69.9%.
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
EN 10088-1 X1CrNi25-21
ASTM A240/A240M S31050
Tensile Strength
Not specified
>=580 MPa
Yield Strength
Not specified
>=270 MPa
Elongation
Not specified
>=25%
Hardness
Not specified
<=217 HB
Condition
Not specified
t <= 0.25 in. (first condition printed); yield by 0.2 percent offset
Typical Applications
EN 10088-1 X1CrNi25-21
Not documented
ASTM A240/A240M S31050
Pressure vessels and general applications (plate, sheet and strip)
Can EN 10088-1 X1CrNi25-21 Be Substituted With ASTM A240/A240M S31050?
EN 10088-1 X1CrNi25-21 and ASTM A240/A240M S31050 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 EN 10088-1 X1CrNi25-21 and ASTM A240/A240M S31050?
Both grades share a similar composition profile; see the specification table above for the exact chemistry and mechanical property values.
Can EN 10088-1 X1CrNi25-21 be substituted with ASTM A240/A240M S31050?
EN 10088-1 X1CrNi25-21 and ASTM A240/A240M S31050 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.