Related Material — 69.9% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
JIS G4102 SNC815 (JIS G 4102:1979) and BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15 (BS 970 (Part 1):1991) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Alloy Steel category.
JIS G4102 SNC815 is typically used for heavily stressed gears, differential components, while BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15 is commonly used for case hardening steel (section four).
JIS G4102 SNC815 is defined under Japanese Industrial Standards (JIS), originating from Japan, while BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15 is defined under British Standards (BS), originating from United Kingdom.
As per chemical composition, JIS G4102 SNC815 vs BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15 is a 74.3% 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%.
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
JIS G4102 SNC815
BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15
Tensile Strength
≥980 MPa
Not specified
Case Hardness HRC
60–65
Not specified
Typical Applications
JIS G4102 SNC815
Heavily stressed gears, differential components
BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15
Case hardening steel (section four)
Key Differences
JIS G4102 SNC815 specifies Si, P, S which are not specified for BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15.
Can JIS G4102 SNC815 Be Substituted With BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15?
JIS G4102 SNC815 and BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15 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 JIS G4102 SNC815 and BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15?
JIS G4102 SNC815 specifies Si, P, S which are not specified for BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15.
Can JIS G4102 SNC815 be substituted with BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15?
JIS G4102 SNC815 and BS 970 (Part 1) 635H15 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.