Related Material — 69.9% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo (IS 1570 (Part 5):1985) and ASTM A959 316H (ASTM A959:2011) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Stainless Steel category.
IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS), originating from India, while ASTM A959 316H is defined under ASTM International, originating from United States.
As per chemical composition, IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo vs ASTM A959 316H is a 72.2% 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%.
Frequently Compared With IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo:
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo
ASTM A959 316H
Hardness
<=269 HB
Not specified
Condition
Annealed, quenched or solution treated plates, sheets and strips (Table 2)
Not specified
Typical Applications
IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo
Not documented
ASTM A959 316H
Wrought stainless steel products; recommended composition limits for adoption by product standards (clause 1.1)
Can IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo Be Substituted With ASTM A959 316H?
IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo and ASTM A959 316H 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 IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo and ASTM A959 316H?
Both grades share a similar composition profile; see the specification table above for the exact chemistry and mechanical property values.
Can IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo be substituted with ASTM A959 316H?
IS 1570 (Part 5) X108Cr17Mo and ASTM A959 316H 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.