4/6/2018 CR4 - Thread: 13%Cr vs 316SS

News & Products & Standards Reference Engineering Stay

Home Free Registration
Analysis Suppliers Library Library Community Informed

Community Search Community GO

Acquired Engineering360

CR4® - The Engineer's Place for News and Discussion® Login | Register for Engineering Community (CR4)

Previous in Forum: Material Similar to Silicone Next in Forum: Cheap Pressure Gauge for Liquid Measuring 60-100 psi

crajkumar 13%Cr vs 316SS

Active Contributor 05/09/2010 6:58 AM

Join Date: Nov 2009

Posts: 12 1. What is the difference between 13% Chromium and 316SS?

The gate valve data sheet shows the stem material ia 13% Cr. But the vendor offer is 316ss. which one is
good.

2. And what material is 13% Cr ?

Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to

this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.
Join CR4, The Engineer's Place for News and Discussion!

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".

#3 "Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS" by NAVEED ATHAR on 05/10/2010 1:12 AM (score 3)

#4 "Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS" by RHABE on 05/10/2010 1:13 AM (score 3)
#7 "Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS" by msamad on 05/11/2010 4:01 PM (score 2)

#1
lyn Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS
Guru 05/09/2010 9:06 AM

Stainless Steel - Grade 316 - Properties, Fabrication and Applications

You'll have to do the research yourself.

Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 40638
Good Answers: 1600

#2
Tornado Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS
Guru 05/09/2010 5:33 PM

SS316 contains 16-18% Cr (chromium).

__________________
In vino veritas; in cervisia carmen; in aqua E. coli.

Join Date: May 2009

Location: Richland, WA,
USA
Posts: 20132
Good Answers: 744

#3
NAVEED ATHAR Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS
Active Contributor 05/10/2010 1:12 AM

Join Date: Jan 2007

Posts: 12
1- SS 316 and its variants generally contain 11-12% Ni along with 17% Cr to which about 2.5% Mo is added
Good Answers: 2 to improve its acid resistance.

2- A material claimed to be containing 13% Cr means, in effect, nothing much to a user unless the other
materials within it are specified, which as a whole, would determine its properties.

3- Since the general knowledge on metallurgy is weak therefore this situation is exploited by many suppliers
by mentioning Cr which indicates some sort of chemical resistance.

Go to Next Good Answer

Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS #5

crajkumar 05/10/2010 4:36 AM In reply to #3

#4
RHABE Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS
Guru 05/10/2010 1:13 AM

Join Date: Dec 2006

Location: Germany 49°
26' N, 7° 46' O
Posts: 1952
Good Answers: 109
Hi,
13%Cr is ferritic/martensitic if low Nickel content and thus is hardenable. Good for high contact stress as in
ball-bearings and tools. See data of 440C. High strength, medium ductility. Complicated heat-treatment if
good dimensional stability is needed.

316SS or comparable 1.4401 or 1.4404 is austenitic, thus not hardenable by heat-treatment, but by Mo-
content still higher strength compared to more ordinary SS. No heat treatment to gain strength npossible,
not particularly stable, not intended for precision parts. But still good for sliding bearings if no fretting
condition is achieved. Very good corrosion resistance in chloride solutions.

RHABE

Go to Next Good Answer

#6
viki_friend Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS
Associate 05/11/2010 10:09 AM

Join Date: Mar 2010

Posts: 33
316SS is superior than 13% Cr.

316ss contains 18% Cr.

check with the vendor that there is no cost implication for changing to 316SS.

A276 gr 410, A240 TP 410 are more commonly used 13% CR materials.

#7
msamad Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS In reply to #6

https://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/54280/13-Cr-vs-316SS 1/3
4/6/2018 CR4 - Thread: 13%Cr vs 316SS
Guru 05/11/2010 4:01 PM

In fact, 13% chromium doesn't specify the quality of any specific stainless steel (SS), while 316 does. The
stainless steel may contain 13% chromium but may not have other good components such as 10% nickel
and 2% molybdenum (the molybdenum is added to help resist corrosion to chlorides like sea water and de-
Join Date: Feb 2009
icing salts). As other contributors already indicated, 316 SS is better than 13% chromium SS in terms of
Location: Houston, USA quality.
Posts: 973
Good Answers: 246 However, 316 SS contains 10% nickel which makes it non-magnetic. All 300 series SS is non-magnetic. So,
if your requirement is magnetic SS, you need to select 400 series (without nickel contents) which has the
ferritic (magnetic) property. But most probably it may not be the requirement for the gate valve.

See these links for more details:

http://www.machinist-materials.com/stainless_table.htm

http://www.ssina.com/faq/index.html

http://www.bosunsupplies.com/stainlessinfo2.cfm

- MS

__________________
"All my technical advices in this forum must be consulted with and approved by a local registered professional engineer before
implementation" - Mohammed Samad (Linkedin Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/msamad)

No more Good Answers.

#8
Kwetz Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS
Guru 05/13/2010 2:44 PM

13% Cr steels (400 series) are commonly specified for valve stems, usually 410 type.

As already explained, 400 series are stainless but not austenitic as 316 type is because of the addition of Ni.
I've see much more valves with martensitic SS stems (Tp 410, 17-4 PH or grade 630, etc.)than with
austenitic ones.

To evaluate the validity of material change respect the valve data sheet, some engineering judgement is
Join Date: Oct 2007 necessary about the stem stresses (tension, buckling...) and the resistance to the medium which is not
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 718
specified (nor the body material, rating, etc)
Good Answers: 25
Without such data it's not possible to take a decision on the validity of such a change.

Kind regards

__________________
It's stupid to discuss about AI: We´ve reached by the "B" way. We' ve producing men as clever as machines.

#9
strider6 Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS
Power-User 05/19/2010 6:31 AM

Join Date: May 2007

Posts: 272
which one is good depends on the type of service and operating conditions.. you should ask the vendor if he
Good Answers: 5 has considered the corrosion resistance of the two materials in your service..

corrosion control

#10
ashfaqanwer Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS In reply to #9
Commentator 05/26/2010 8:23 AM

SS316 is austenitic SS having higher corrosion resistance as compared to 13Cr. You should consider your
Join Date: Apr 2010
requirement in order to make the right decision. If your requirement explicitly says that you require SS316,
Posts: 66 there is no point in considering 13Cr ferritic/martensitic SS. Regards, Ashfaq Anwer http://thepetrostree
Good Answers: 1 t.com

#11
fusionblr Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS
Member 07/06/2010 10:19 AM

Join Date: Jul 2010

Posts: 8
Dear Sir,

SS 316 has 18-20% Cr, 10-12% Ni & 2.5% Mo. The microstructure is mainly Austenite with 6-9% ferrite.

While 13% Cr Stainless Steels can be heat treated to a hardness of 45-48HRC & is mainly used for PVC
Moulding.

Fusion

#12
Anonymous Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS In reply to #11
Poster 08/19/2010 2:49 AM

Be careful with SS316 if it is a Chloride environment

#13
fusionblr Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS
Member 08/20/2010 7:04 AM

Join Date: Jul 2010

Posts: 8
Dear Rajkumar,

1. Cost wise 13%Cr is cheaper. It is basically SS410 or SS420. They are heat treatable to 40-45HRC. (
Approx. 0.3-0.35%C, 13-14%Cr )

2. Qualitywise SS316L is better ( Higher % of Cr, Ni & Mo ) & pricewise maybe higher than 13% Cr. If there
is any direct contact with chloride media like Hydro Chloric Acid. Better go for SS 420.

Satish

Register to Reply 13 comments

Back to top
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.
Join CR4, The Engineer's Place for News and Discussion!

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".

#3 "Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS" by NAVEED ATHAR on 05/10/2010 1:12 AM (score 3)

#4 "Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS" by RHABE on 05/10/2010 1:13 AM (score 3)
#7 "Re: 13%Cr vs 316SS" by msamad on 05/11/2010 4:01 PM (score 2)

Users who posted comments: Copy to Clipboard

Anonymous Poster (1); ashfaqanwer (1); crajkumar (1); fusionblr (2); Kwetz (1); lyn (1); msamad (1); NAVEED ATHAR (1); RHABE (1); strider6 (1); Tornado
(1); viki_friend (1)

Previous in Forum: Material Similar to Silicone Next in Forum: Cheap Pressure Gauge for Liquid Measuring 60-100 psi
You might be interested in: Hazardous Material Storage, Nondestructive Testing (NDT) Material Testers, Dry Material (Powders) Level Switches

Advertisement

https://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/54280/13-Cr-vs-316SS 2/3
4/6/2018 CR4 - Thread: 13%Cr vs 316SS

"To follow, without halt, one aim: there's the secret of success" -- Anna Pavlova

All times are displayed in US/Eastern (EDT) (Register to change time zone)

© 2018 IEEE GlobalSpec. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. The information contained on this site is by users for users and is provided for
information purposes only and does not constitute advice. Any views or opinions expressed by users are personal to them and do not represent the views or opinions of IEEE GlobalSpec. You should
check any information and use your own judgment or seek expert advice before doing or not doing anything on the basis of what you read here. IEEE GlobalSpec does not verify or warrant the
accuracy or completeness of any information on this site and, to the extent permitted by law, IEEE GlobalSpec shall not be liable for any loss, damage or expense incurred by reliance on it or for any
dealings you have with users or other third parties that take place using or facilitated by this site.

Home | Site Map | Contact | Accessibility | Nondiscrimination Policy | Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

https://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/54280/13-Cr-vs-316SS 3/3