EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 vs IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH

Minimal Match — 35% match based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.

EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 (EN 10088-3:2014) and IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH (IS 1570 (Part 7):1992) are both steel grades. Both fall under the Stainless Steel category. EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 is typically used for general purposes, semi-finished products, bars, rods, wire, sections and bright products, while IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH is commonly used for boilers, pressure vessels, steam turbines, steam and water piping and other power plant equipment working at elevated temperature. EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 is defined under European Standard (EN), originating from Europe, while IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS), originating from India.

As per chemical composition, EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 vs IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH is a 50.1% match. As per mechanical properties, the match is 4.8%. Combined, this makes them a minimal match overall at 35%.

Frequently Compared With EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2:
GOST 5632 06Kh23N28 EN 10088-1 1.4006 EN 10088-1 1.4301 EN 10088-1 1.4401 EN 10088-1 1.4845 ASTM A959 .- GB/T 3280 06Cr19Ni10 GOST 5632 08X18H10 IS 1570 (Part 7) 12Cr12MoH IS 1570 (Part 7) 12Cr12MoVH IS 1570 (Part 7) 12Cr12Ni2Mo IS 1570 (Part 7) 12Cr13H
Match Breakdown
CHEMISTRY MATCH
50.1%
MECHANICAL MATCH
4.8%
OVERALL
35%
Specifications
Property EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH
Standard EN 10088-3:2014 IS 1570 (Part 7):1992
Category Stainless Steel Stainless Steel
C (%) <=0.04 0.07-0.15
Si (%) <=1.00 <=1.00
Mn (%) <=2.00 <=1.00
P (%) <=0.045 <=0.045
S (%) <=0.015 <=0.030
Cr (%) 16.5-17.5 15.5-17.50
Mo (%) 2.00-2.50 Not specified
Ni (%) 10.0-11.0 12.00-14.50
N (%) <=0.10 Not specified
Cu (%) 3.0-3.5 Not specified
W (%) Not specified 2.5-3.5
Ti (%) Not specified >=4xC, <=0.80
B (%) Not specified <=0.0006
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH
Tensile Strength 450-650 MPa 600-800 MPa
Yield Strength >=175 MPa >=390 MPa (0.2 % proof stress)
Elongation >=45% >=25%
Hardness <=215 HB Not specified
Condition Solution annealed (+AT), conditions 1C, 1E, 1D, 1X, 1G and 2D, thickness or diameter up to 160 mm; Yield Strength is Rp0.2, Elongation is A (longitudinal), hardness for guidance only Bars, forgings, pipes, hot cold worked, thickness up to 60 (first row of Table 3)
Typical Applications
EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2
General purposes, semi-finished products, bars, rods, wire, sections and bright products
IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH
Boilers, pressure vessels, steam turbines, steam and water piping and other power plant equipment working at elevated temperature
Key Differences
Can EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 Be Substituted With IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH?
EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 and IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH 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.
On M-EX Right Now
EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2
0 active listings and RFQs →
IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH
0 active listings and RFQs →
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 and IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH?
EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 specifies Mo, N, Cu which are not specified for IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH. IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH specifies W, Ti, B which are not specified for EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2.
Can EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 be substituted with IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH?
EN 10088-3 X3CrNiCuMo17-11-3-2 and IS 1570 (Part 7) 11Cr17Ni13W3TiH 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.