IS 1570 (Part 5) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4 vs GOST 5632 08X18H10
Minimal Match — 35% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
IS 1570 (Part 5) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4 (IS 1570 (Part 5):1985) and GOST 5632 08X18H10 (GOST 5632-2014) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Stainless Steel category.
IS 1570 (Part 5) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4 is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS) (India).
As per chemical composition, IS 1570 (Part 5) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4 vs GOST 5632 08X18H10 is a 67.6% match.
As per mechanical properties, the match is 33.3%.
Combined, this makes them a minimal match overall at 35%.
Frequently Compared With IS 1570 (Part 5) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4:
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) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4
GOST 5632 08X18H10
Tensile Strength
>=515 MPa
≥520 MPa
Yield Strength
>=275 MPa (0.2 % proof stress)
≥205 MPa
Elongation
>=40% (50 mm)
≥40%
Hardness
<=217 HB
Not specified
Condition
Annealed, quenched or solution treated bars and flats (Table 3)
Not specified
Typical Applications
IS 1570 (Part 5) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4
Not documented
GOST 5632 08X18H10
Chemical equipment, food processing, general corrosion resistant applications
Can IS 1570 (Part 5) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4 Be Substituted With GOST 5632 08X18H10?
IS 1570 (Part 5) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4 and GOST 5632 08X18H10 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) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4 and GOST 5632 08X18H10?
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) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4 be substituted with GOST 5632 08X18H10?
IS 1570 (Part 5) X10Cr17Mn6Ni4 and GOST 5632 08X18H10 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.