Materials / Compare
Stainless 17-4PH vs. DMLS 316L Stainless Steel
Compare Stainless 17-4PH vs. DMLS 316L Stainless Steel strength, stiffness, weight and thermal properties.
| Try it on a partA bracket to run stress or thermal on, free in your browser | Open in LessCAD | Open in LessCAD |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanical | ||
| Yield strength | 1,275MPasourcetypical, transverse, sheet/strip | 530MPasourcetypical, as manufactured, horizontal |
| Ultimate tensile strength | 1,379MPasourcetypical, transverse, sheet/strip | 640MPasourcetypical, as manufactured, horizontal |
| Elongation at break | 9%sourcetypical, transverse, in 2 in. (50.8 mm) | 40%sourcetypical at break, as manufactured, horizontal |
| Young's modulus (stiffness) | 197GPasourceH 900 | 185GPasourcetypical, as built, horizontal (XY); EOSINT M280-400W / M290-400W, 316L_Surface 1.0, 20 µm (2014 sheet) |
| Density | 7,800kg/m³sourceH 900 | 7,900kg/m³sourcepart density (ISO 3369, not labelled min or typical), EOS M 290, 40 µm FlexLine |
| Strength to weight | 163kN·m/kg2.44x higher | 67.1kN·m/kg |
| Stiffness to weight | 25.3MN·m/kg8% higher | 23.4MN·m/kg |
| Poisson's ratio | 0.272sourceH 900 (column) | 0.3sourcebase material: austenitic stainless steels incl. 1.4404 (316L), design value |
| Shear modulus | 77.4GPa9% stiffer in shear | 71.2GPa |
| Bulk modulus | 144GPa | 154GPa |
| Speed of sound | 5,026m/s | 4,839m/s |
| Thermal | ||
| Thermal conductivity | 17.9W/m·Ksourceat 149 °C (300 °F), H 900 | 16.2W/m·Ksourcebase material: wrought 316/316L (Cleveland-Cliffs), at 100 °C |
| Thermal expansion | 10.8µm/m·Ksourcemean, 21–93 °C (70–200 °F), H 900 | 15.7µm/m·Ksourcemean 25-100 °C, ASTM E228 |
| 100 mm part over a 50 °C swing | 54µm growth46% less | 78.6µm growth |
| Specific heat | 460J/kg·Ksourcemean, 0–100 °C, H 900 | 500J/kg·Ksourcebase material: wrought 316/316L (Cleveland-Cliffs), 0-100 °C |
| Heats up and cools (diffusivity) | 4.99mm²/s22% faster | 4.1mm²/s |
| Thermal shock resistance | 7,809W/m3.78x more resistant | 2,067W/m |
| Max service temperature | 316°Csourcestrength-retention limit (not oxidation) | not sourced |
| Values for | Cleveland-Cliffs 17-4 PH, Condition H 900, sheet/strip, transverse (Product Data Bulletin, May 2021) | EOS StainlessSteel 316L (powder 9011-0032), EOS M 290, ParameterSet 316L 20µm Surface M290/400W, as manufactured, horizontal; ISO 6892-1 |
Every value links to the document that states it. "Not sourced" means no citable source states it (or only a specification minimum); figures computed from it are left out too.
DMLS 316L Stainless Steel is 3D printed: its properties depend on build direction and print settings; these are typical values.
Questions
Is Stainless 17-4PH stronger than DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
Stainless 17-4PH is stronger: its yield strength is 1,275 MPa against 530 MPa for DMLS 316L Stainless Steel (2.41x).
Which is lighter, Stainless 17-4PH or DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
Stainless 17-4PH is lighter: 7,800 kg/m³ against 7,900 kg/m³ for DMLS 316L Stainless Steel.
Which is stiffer, Stainless 17-4PH or DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
Stainless 17-4PH is stiffer: Young's modulus 197 GPa against 185 GPa for DMLS 316L Stainless Steel, so the same part in Stainless 17-4PH deflects less under the same load.
Which is lighter for the same job, Stainless 17-4PH or DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
For the same stiffness or strength: Stainless 17-4PH is lighter for a stiff rod or tie (tension), stiff beam (bending), stiff panel or plate, strong rod or tie, strong beam, strong panel or plate.
| Part that must be | Stainless 17-4PH | DMLS 316L Stainless Steel |
|---|---|---|
| Stiff rod or tie (tension) | lighter | 8% heavier |
| Stiff beam (bending) | lighter | 5% heavier |
| Stiff panel or plate | lighter | 3% heavier |
| Strong rod or tie | lighter | 2.44x heavier |
| Strong beam | lighter | 1.82x heavier |
| Strong panel or plate | lighter | 1.57x heavier |
For the same stiffness or strength, mass scales with density over stiffness (or strength) raised to a power set by how the part is loaded: 1 for a rod in tension, 1/2 for a beam in bending, 1/3 for a panel (the standard material-selection indices).
Which conducts heat better, Stainless 17-4PH or DMLS 316L Stainless Steel?
Stainless 17-4PH conducts heat better: 17.9 W/m·K against 16.2 W/m·K for DMLS 316L Stainless Steel.
Which expands less with temperature?
Stainless 17-4PH expands less: 10.8 µm/m·K against 15.7 µm/m·K for DMLS 316L Stainless Steel.
Among 59 materials
Related comparisons
- Stainless 17-4PH vs. Nickel Inconel 718
- Stainless 17-4PH vs. Steel AISI 4340
- Stainless 17-4PH vs. DMLS 17-4PH Stainless Steel
- Stainless 17-4PH vs. DMLS Ti-6Al-4V ELI Titanium
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel AISI 1045
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel A992
- DMLS 316L Stainless Steel vs. Steel AISI 1018