304 vs 430 – Composition, Heat Treatment, Properties, and Applications
Share
Table Of Content
Table Of Content
Introduction
Engineers and procurement teams frequently choose between 304 and 430 stainless steels when balancing corrosion resistance, formability, weldability, and cost for fabricated components. Typical decision contexts include kitchen equipment and food-contact parts (where corrosion resistance and hygiene are paramount) versus decorative or magnetic applications where cost and magnetic response matter more.
The fundamental distinction between these two common grades is their alloying strategy: 304 is an austenitic, nickel-containing stainless steel optimized for broad corrosion resistance and ductility, while 430 is a ferritic, low‑nickel stainless steel optimized for cost-effective corrosion resistance and magnetic response. Because of these differences, 304 and 430 are often compared where tradeoffs among corrosion performance, fabricability, and magnetism are relevant to design and procurement.
1. Standards and Designations
Major international standards that cover 304 and 430 include:
- ASTM / ASME:
- 304: ASTM A240 (plate, sheet), A276 (bar), A312 (pipe/tube)
- 430: ASTM A240 (plate, sheet), A376 / A480 references
- EN (European):
- 304 ≈ EN 1.4301 (also known as X5CrNi18-10)
- 430 ≈ EN 1.4016 (also known as X6Cr17)
- JIS (Japanese): SUS304, SUS430
- GB (Chinese): 304 (06Cr19Ni10), 430 (0Cr17)
Material type: - 304: stainless (austenitic) - 430: stainless (ferritic)
Both are stainless steels; they are not carbon, tool, alloy, or HSLA steels.
2. Chemical Composition and Alloying Strategy
The following table gives typical composition ranges (weight percent) for common commercial 304 and 430 grades in the annealed condition. These are typical published ranges; individual material certificates should be consulted for exact values.
| Element | 304 (typical) | 430 (typical) |
|---|---|---|
| C | ≤ 0.08 | ≤ 0.12 |
| Mn | ≤ 2.0 | ≤ 1.0 |
| Si | ≤ 0.75 | ≤ 1.0 |
| P | ≤ 0.045 | ≤ 0.04 |
| S | ≤ 0.03 | ≤ 0.03 |
| Cr | 18.0–20.0 | 16.0–18.0 |
| Ni | 8.0–10.5 | ≤ 0.75 |
| Mo | — (generally 0) | — (generally 0) |
| V | — | — |
| Nb | — | — |
| Ti | — | — |
| B | — | — |
| N | trace | trace |
How alloying affects properties: - Chromium (Cr) provides the passive oxide layer for corrosion resistance. Higher Cr generally increases oxidation/corrosion resistance. - Nickel (Ni) stabilizes the face‑centered cubic (austenitic) structure at room temperature; it improves toughness, ductility, and general corrosion resistance. The presence of Ni is the primary difference that makes 304 non‑magnetic (in the annealed state) and 430 magnetic (ferritic). - Carbon (C) affects strength and potential sensitization. Lower carbon variants (e.g., 304L) reduce carbide precipitation risk. - Manganese (Mn) and silicon (Si) are deoxidizers and influence hot workability and strength modestly. - Mo and N (not present significantly in these two grades) would be used to improve pitting resistance; their absence limits performance in chloride environments.
3. Microstructure and Heat Treatment Response
- 304: Typical microstructure is fully austenitic (FCC) at room temperature when produced to specification. Austenite is stable at ambient temperatures due to nickel. 304 does not harden by quenching; it is strengthened by cold work. Standard thermal processes:
- Annealing (typically 1010–1150 °C followed by rapid cooling) restores ductility and dissolves precipitates.
- Sensitization (carbide precipitation at ~450–850 °C) may occur during prolonged exposure, risking intergranular corrosion; low‑carbon (304L) or stabilized (321/347) grades are used to avoid this.
- Normalizing or quench-and-temper are not applicable ways to harden 304.
- 430: Typical microstructure is ferritic (BCC) at room temperature. Ferrite is magnetic. 430 is not hardenable by quench-and-temper to develop martensite in the same way as martensitic steels; like 304, it is primarily strengthened by cold work. Thermal response:
- Solution annealing and normalization are used to relieve stresses and restore ductility.
- Ferritic grades are susceptible to grain growth and embrittlement above certain temperatures; prolonged exposure to 475 °C (475 °F embrittlement range) can reduce toughness.
- 430 is not prone to austenite stabilization, so it maintains ferritic structure throughout typical processing.
In summary, 304 offers an austenitic microstructure that resists brittle phase formation at room temperature and retains high toughness; 430 is ferritic and must be processed with attention to grain growth and embrittlement.
4. Mechanical Properties
The table below lists typical mechanical property ranges for annealed commercial materials; these are indicative ranges and depend on product form and exact temper.
| Property (annealed) | 304 (typical) | 430 (typical) |
|---|---|---|
| Tensile strength (MPa) | ~480–720 | ~450–600 |
| Yield strength 0.2% (MPa) | ~170–300 | ~200–300 |
| Elongation (% in 50 mm) | ~40–60 | ~20–35 |
| Charpy impact (room temp) | Generally high, good toughness | Lower than 304; moderate toughness |
| Hardness (HB) | ~120–200 | ~120–200 |
Interpretation: - 304 generally exhibits higher ductility and superior impact toughness owing to its austenitic structure and nickel content. - Yield strength ranges can overlap; 430 may show similar or slightly higher yield in some product forms but typically with less elongation and toughness. - 304 is the more ductile and tough choice for severe forming and low‑temperature applications; 430 can be acceptable where ductility and impact resistance requirements are moderate.
5. Weldability
Weldability considerations hinge on carbon equivalent and propensity for cracking, grain growth, and sensitization. Representative indices used in weldability assessment include:
-
Carbon equivalent (IIW):
$$CE_{IIW} = C + \frac{Mn}{6} + \frac{Cr+Mo+V}{5} + \frac{Ni+Cu}{15}$$ -
The more complex Pcm index:
$$P_{cm} = C + \frac{Si}{30} + \frac{Mn+Cu}{20} + \frac{Cr+Mo+V}{10} + \frac{Ni}{40} + \frac{Nb}{50} + \frac{Ti}{30} + \frac{B}{1000}$$
Qualitative interpretation: - 304: Excellent weldability in general. Austenitic structure does not transform to brittle phases on cooling, so risk of cold cracking from martensitic transformations is low. However, weld thermal cycles can cause sensitization (carbide precipitation) in the 450–850 °C range; post‑weld solution annealing or using low‑carbon (304L) or stabilized grades is common when corrosion in the heat‑affected zone is a concern. Weld metal selection and filler matching are straightforward (e.g., ER304/308 fillers). - 430: Weldable but with caveats. Ferritic structure can experience grain growth and reduced ductility in the heat‑affected zone; preheating and controlled interpass temperatures may be recommended for thick sections to limit thermal stresses. 430's lower carbon and alloy content reduces hardenability concerns, but its ferritic nature can cause delta‑ferrite/embrittlement issues in extreme conditions. Filler alloys and process selection should account for differences in thermal expansion and metallurgical compatibility.
No numeric CE or Pcm calculation is provided here, but these formulas illustrate the factors influencing weldability.
6. Corrosion and Surface Protection
Both 304 and 430 are stainless steels (they form a chromium oxide passive film), but their corrosion behavior differs in detail.
-
304: Good general corrosion resistance in many environments including atmospheric exposure, food processing, and mild chemicals. 304 is more resistant to chloride attack and general corrosion than 430 because of higher nickel content and stabilized austenitic microstructure. However, in chloride‑rich environments (marine, splashing seawater), 304 can suffer pitting and crevice corrosion; Mo‑bearing grades (e.g., 316) are preferred in those cases. Sensitization risk (intergranular corrosion) exists for 304 after prolonged heating in the sensitization range; use 304L or stabilized grades if service includes welding without solution annealing.
-
430: Good resistance to oxidation and mild corrosive atmospheres; adequate for indoor decorative, appliance, and automotive trim applications. 430 has inferior resistance to chloride pitting and crevice corrosion compared with 304. For aggressive environments, 430 is not recommended.
When using pitting resistance equivalent number (PREN) to compare alloys: $$\text{PREN} = \text{Cr} + 3.3 \times \text{Mo} + 16 \times \text{N}$$ Neither 304 nor 430 contain significant Mo or N, so PREN is of limited utility for differentiating them; it is more informative when Mo and N levels vary (e.g., duplex, superaustenitic grades).
Surface protection for parts where stainless performance is insufficient: - For carbon or low‑alloy steels (not applicable to 304/430), galvanizing, painting, or coatings are common. - For 430 in harsher conditions, additional coatings or surface treatments (electroplating, passivation, ornamental finishes) can extend service life.
7. Fabrication, Machinability, and Formability
- Formability:
- 304: Excellent formability and drawability; used widely for deep drawing, complex pressed shapes, and tubing where good elongation is required.
- 430: Good formability in sheet rolling and light stamping but lower ductility than 304 for severe forming operations.
- Machinability:
- Austenitic 304 work‑hardens rapidly, which can reduce machining rates and tool life unless appropriate tooling, feeds, and lubricants are used.
- Ferritic 430 typically machines more easily than 304; it does not work‑harden as aggressively and often gives better surface finish with conventional tooling.
- Finishing:
- Both grades can be polished, brushed, and finished to common surface classes (e.g., 2B, BA, No. 4). 304 tends to take a finer polish for decorative and sanitary applications.
- Bending and welding:
- 304 is more tolerant of deep bending and complex forming.
- 430 requires attention to springback and potential grain‑growth effects if welded.
8. Typical Applications
| 304 — Typical Applications | 430 — Typical Applications |
|---|---|
| Food processing equipment, kitchen sinks, cookware, and appliances | Decorative trim, automotive interior/exterior trim, control panels |
| Chemical process equipment and storage tanks (non‑chloride environments) | Range hoods, dishwasher exteriors (in less aggressive environments) |
| Medical devices, pharmaceutical equipment | Magnetic components where ferromagnetism is required |
| Architectural panels, handrails, benches | Low‑cost sinks and appliance panels where magnetism or cost is prioritized |
| Fasteners and fittings where corrosion resistance and formability required | Exhaust trims, grill components, and decorative hardware |
Selection rationale: - Choose 304 where corrosion performance, hygiene, deep forming, and low‑temperature toughness are primary requirements. - Choose 430 where cost, magnetic response, and adequate corrosion resistance for indoor or mildly corrosive environments are key.
9. Cost and Availability
- Cost: 304 is generally more expensive than 430 due to significant nickel content. Nickel price volatility directly affects the relative cost premium of 304.
- Availability: Both grades are widely available worldwide in sheets, coils, strips, tubes, and bars. 304 is ubiquitous in a broad range of product forms and finishes; 430 is commonly stocked for appliance and decorative markets and is often the economical choice for non‑critical applications.
- Product forms: 304 is more commonly specified for sanitary tubing and high‑specification plate; 430 is common for stamped parts and decorative panels.
10. Summary and Recommendation
Summary table (qualitative):
| Attribute | 304 | 430 |
|---|---|---|
| Weldability | Very good (beware sensitization; use 304L or stabilised grades if needed) | Good with precautions (grain growth, HAZ considerations) |
| Strength–Toughness | High toughness and ductility; good strength | Moderate toughness; adequate strength, lower ductility |
| Corrosion resistance | Superior general corrosion resistance; better in chloride environments than 430 | Good in mild environments; inferior to 304 in chlorides or aggressive media |
| Cost | Higher (nickel content) | Lower (low‑nickel ferritic) |
| Magnetic response | Essentially non‑magnetic (annealed) | Magnetic (ferritic) |
Recommendations: - Choose 304 if: - You require high ductility, excellent low‑temperature toughness, and superior corrosion resistance in general and mild chloride environments. - The application involves food, medical, chemical process, or architectural exposure where hygiene and appearance matter. - Non‑magnetic behavior is required. - Choose 430 if: - You need a cost‑effective stainless solution for decorative or indoor applications where severe corrosion resistance is not required. - Magnetic properties are required or useful (e.g., for electromagnetic compatibility, magnetic mounting, or aesthetic reasons). - Machinability and moderate formability are needed at a lower material cost.
Closing note: Always confirm exact material specification and mechanical test certificates from suppliers for the intended product form and temper. For critical environments (chloride exposure, elevated temperatures, or welded pressure vessels), consult corrosion engineering guidance and codes to select appropriate alloying (for instance, consider 316, duplex, or stabilized grades where necessary).