Machining 17-4 SS, H1150 vs. H900 vs. "A"
Largest Manufacturing Technology
Community On The Web
Close
Login to Your Account

Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Spanish Fort, AL
    Posts
    190
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1

    Default Machining 17-4 SS, H1150 vs. H900 vs. "A"

    I am looking to make a couple of small home use parts on my SB10L lathe, and am considering using 17-4 stainless steel. The parts are 5/16" to 3/8" OD, and involve some tapered ID turning, and both internal and external threading.

    Any of the 17-4 options would be quite a bit higher yield than the 316 that I used before, so strength is not my prime consideration when shopping for the right heat treatment. But any practical advice on the differences in machining H1150, H900, or Annealed 17-4 would be very much appreciated.

    Thanks,

    Jeff

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    25,113
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The selling literature makes a flat statement:

    Do Not Use In The Annealed Condition

    H1100(or H1150) machines nicely and you can actually buy it

    H900 is hard - like 44 Rockwell C, and I have never heard of it being for sale, but only getting to that condition by heat treat. I don't think I would try to machine H900 on a 10L.

    Ordinarily with 17-4, you make something from A and then send it off to get it to H900, or whatever other hardness you need and can't readily buy like that.

    John Oder

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Spanish Fort, AL
    Posts
    190
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1

    Default

    McMaster has it available in all three conditions (H900, H1150, and annealed). I didn't see a caution on their site against using it in the annealed condition, though I did later see that warning elsewhere. Why?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    25,113
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Why?
    Real simple - annealed does not have near the properties the heat treated stuff has. It is after all a high strength alloy - but only when heat treated.

    John Oder

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hatch, NM Chile capital of the WORLD
    Posts
    6,863
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7082
    Likes (Received)
    6413

    Default

    Definitely an H1150, cuts much much easier than annealed(solution treated), not as gummy and a higher machinability rating. Even though an H900 is up in the mid 40's C scale, its pretty darn easy to machine also.

    On the never use in the annealed condition, I hadn't heard that until recently either. In fact we do a lot of 17-4 castings and do the assemblies also. Annealed condition, no heat treat. Ground support equipment, not critical, I'm just saying... I prefer it heat treated myself.

    By far and away my favorite stainless, well maybe its a tie with 303, but 17-4 is so much more functional.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    RC, CA
    Posts
    1,766
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    167
    Likes (Received)
    288

    Default

    I thought not using 17-4 in condition A had something to do with susceptibility to stress corrosion cracking. Or maybe that was another alloy.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •