Global Manufacturing Partner
Material GuideA413 vs A380 die casting

A413 vs A380 -When Pressure Tightness Justifies the Alloy Switch

A413 vs A380 die casting: when A413's near-eutectic composition and lower porosity justify replacing A380 for hydraulic manifolds, pneumatic valves, and thermal management applications.

2 min read
Last updated: 2026-04-08

Supporting Visuals

Production images for this page

These images are pulled from your current KastMfg asset library. Page-specific files automatically override shared fallback visuals when you add them later.

A413 vs A380 -When Pressure Tightness Justifies the Alloy Switch - Raw Alloy / Casting Sample
Page image

Raw Alloy / Casting Sample

Add a material sample, casting coupon, or alloy family photo to break up the technical content and anchor the page visually.

Best as a product-on-table shot

A413 vs A380 -When Pressure Tightness Justifies the Alloy Switch - Application Example
Page image

Application Example

Place a real end-use component photo that shows where this alloy performs well in production.

Best as an application component photo

A413 vs A380 -Pressure Tightness vs General Purpose

A380 is the general-purpose choice: best balance of strength, castability, machinability, and cost. A413 is the pressure-tight specialist: slightly weaker, slightly more expensive, but with significantly better internal soundness. Choose based on whether pressure tightness is a design requirement.


Comparison

Parameter A413 A380
Silicon 11.0-13.0% (near-eutectic) 7.5-8.5%
Copper 1.0% max 3.0-4.0%
Tensile strength 290 MPa 317 MPa
Yield strength 145 MPa 159 MPa
Thermal conductivity 121 W/m·K 96 W/m·K
Pressure tightness Best -near-eutectic microstructure Good
Porosity level (equivalent process) Lower -finer solidification Moderate
Machinability Good Excellent
Cost premium ~3-% Baseline

Why A413 Has Lower Porosity

At A413's near-eutectic composition (12% Si, eutectic at 12.6%), solidification occurs with minimal dendrite formation -the microstructure is finer, shrinkage is lower, and inter-dendritic porosity channels are smaller and less interconnected. The result: reliably lower porosity per unit volume versus A380 in the same geometry and process conditions.

For a hydraulic manifold, the difference between Class 2 and Class 4 porosity (ASTM E505) can be the difference between passing and failing a 200 bar leak test.


When to Switch from A380 to A413

Switch to A413 when:

  • Rated working pressure exceeds 80-100 bar and impregnation is not acceptable
  • Helium leak test is required (<10^-5 mbar·L/s)
  • Thermal conductivity is the design driver (121 vs 96 W/m·K -26% better)
  • Internal soundness certification to ASTM E505 Class 1- is required

A380 is adequate when:

  • No pressure tightness requirement
  • Maximum tensile strength needed (A380: 317 vs A413: 290 MPa)
  • Extensive CNC machining planned (A380 better machinability)
  • General structural or enclosure application

The Cost Calculation

A413 costs ~3-% more per kg than A380. On a 1 kg casting at $3.00/kg material: $0.09-0.15/part premium. If this switch eliminates:

  • Pressure test rework cycles: $1-/part
  • VPI impregnation post-process: $1-/part
  • Field leakage warranty returns: $20-100/part returned

The alloy switch pays for itself on the first quality event it prevents.


Hydraulic alloy selection: yaoqingpu1983@gmail.com | +86 138 1403 4409

Related Resources

Continue the research path

Need a Quote for Your Project?

Our engineering team is ready to review your requirements and provide competitive pricing with fast turnaround.

Request a Quote