Related Material — 67% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
IS 1570 (Part 5) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N (IS 1570 (Part 5):1985) and ASTM A959 309 (ASTM A959:2011) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Stainless Steel category.
IS 1570 (Part 5) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS), originating from India, while ASTM A959 309 is defined under ASTM International, originating from United States.
As per chemical composition, IS 1570 (Part 5) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N vs ASTM A959 309 is a 67% 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 67%.
Frequently Compared With IS 1570 (Part 5) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N:
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) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N
ASTM A959 309
Hardness
>=321 HB
Not specified
Condition
Valve steel, hardened and tempered (Table 6)
Not specified
Typical Applications
IS 1570 (Part 5) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N
Not documented
ASTM A959 309
Wrought stainless steel products; recommended composition limits for adoption by product standards (clause 1.1)
Can IS 1570 (Part 5) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N Be Substituted With ASTM A959 309?
IS 1570 (Part 5) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N and ASTM A959 309 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) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N and ASTM A959 309?
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) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N be substituted with ASTM A959 309?
IS 1570 (Part 5) X53Cr22Mn9Ni4N and ASTM A959 309 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.