Minimal Match — 35% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
IS 2062 E165 (IS 2062:2006) and GOST 19281 09G2S (GOST 19281-2014) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Structural Steel category.
IS 2062 E165 is typically used for structural work: welded, bolted and riveted structures and general engineering purposes, while GOST 19281 09G2S is commonly used for used for bridges, pressure vessels, pipelines, structural frames, and heavy equipment components..
IS 2062 E165 is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS) (India).
As per chemical composition, IS 2062 E165 vs GOST 19281 09G2S is a 64.1% match.
As per mechanical properties, the match is 0%.
Combined, this makes them a minimal match overall at 35%.
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
IS 2062 E165
GOST 19281 09G2S
Tensile Strength
>=290 MPa
490-640 MPa
Yield Strength
165 MPa (all thicknesses)
345 MPa min
Elongation
>=23%
21% min
Impact
not required
Not specified
Hardness
Not specified
140-190 HB
Typical Applications
IS 2062 E165
Structural work: welded, bolted and riveted structures and general engineering purposes
GOST 19281 09G2S
Used for bridges, pressure vessels, pipelines, structural frames, and heavy equipment components.
Key Differences
GOST 19281 09G2S specifies Si, Ni, Cr, Cu which are not specified for IS 2062 E165.
Can IS 2062 E165 Be Substituted With GOST 19281 09G2S?
IS 2062 E165 and GOST 19281 09G2S 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 2062 E165 and GOST 19281 09G2S?
GOST 19281 09G2S specifies Si, Ni, Cr, Cu which are not specified for IS 2062 E165.
Can IS 2062 E165 be substituted with GOST 19281 09G2S?
IS 2062 E165 and GOST 19281 09G2S 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.