EN 10088-1 X6CrMoS19-2 vs IS 1570 (Part 5) X04Cr19Ni13Mo3
Related Material — 69.9% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
EN 10088-1 X6CrMoS19-2 (EN 10088-1:2023) and IS 1570 (Part 5) X04Cr19Ni13Mo3 (IS 1570 (Part 5):1985) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Stainless Steel category.
EN 10088-1 X6CrMoS19-2 is defined under European Standard (EN), originating from Europe, while IS 1570 (Part 5) X04Cr19Ni13Mo3 is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS), originating from India.
As per chemical composition, EN 10088-1 X6CrMoS19-2 vs IS 1570 (Part 5) X04Cr19Ni13Mo3 is a 75.8% 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 X6CrMoS19-2
IS 1570 (Part 5) X04Cr19Ni13Mo3
Tensile Strength
Not specified
>=515 MPa
Yield Strength
Not specified
>=205 MPa (0.2 % proof stress)
Elongation
Not specified
>=35% (50 mm)
Hardness
Not specified
<=217 HB; <=95 HRB
Condition
Not specified
Annealed, quenched or solution treated plates, sheets and strips (Table 2)
Can EN 10088-1 X6CrMoS19-2 Be Substituted With IS 1570 (Part 5) X04Cr19Ni13Mo3?
EN 10088-1 X6CrMoS19-2 and IS 1570 (Part 5) X04Cr19Ni13Mo3 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 X6CrMoS19-2 and IS 1570 (Part 5) X04Cr19Ni13Mo3?
Both grades share a similar composition profile; see the specification table above for the exact chemistry and mechanical property values.
Can EN 10088-1 X6CrMoS19-2 be substituted with IS 1570 (Part 5) X04Cr19Ni13Mo3?
EN 10088-1 X6CrMoS19-2 and IS 1570 (Part 5) X04Cr19Ni13Mo3 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.