×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

(OP)
I noticed that in my ASTM specification there is a footnote for the manganese in the chemical requirements table.

The foot note states:

"For each reduction of 0.01 percentage point below the specified maximum for carbon, an increase of 0.06 percentage point above the specified maximum for manganese is permitted, up to a maximum of 1.50% by heat analysis and 1.60% by product analysis."

The ASME spec. that I have (it's dated) does not have this footnote.  I understand that ASME usually updates their specs to match ASTM and my question is:

Does anyone who has the current ASME see any footnotes etc. like this, concerning manganese?

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

SecIIA, Ed2004 Add2005 SA-516/SA-516M (Identical with ASTM Specification A 516/A 516M-90)- no such footnote.

I'm still waiting for Addenda 2006, so I can't say what's new.

Konrad

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

ASME material specs. DO NOT always match ASTM. Pick up any ASME Code Book and read the "Forward". It will also tell how to deal with MTRs/material only marked "A-***" if they match.

The Code Committees have good reasons for doing this and  have included a ASTM Reference in the new edition.

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

Each SA spec in ASME II has a note on the cover/first page specifying which ASTM edition it is identical with. I did not check the foot note but expect that the ASTM listed on the front page SA spect should be identical. I would not be surprised if that little foot note was an actual reason for use older ASTM spec for ASME BPV Code.
Please don't confuse A and SA materials. Use what the code specifies.

Putting Human Factor Back in Engineering

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

(OP)
Yes.  The 2004 ASME spec. that I'm talking about references the 1990 ASTM spec.

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

ASMT B16.5 and B36.10 refer to ASTM specifications.  What criteria besides pressure vessels should use ASME material specifications instead of ASTM material specifications?

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

ASME material should be used when the design code or owner/user specs dictate so.

Putting Human Factor Back in Engineering

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

(OP)
I work for an iron and steelmaking company and we produce steel to CSA, SAE, ASME and ASTM.  

For the most part the ASTM and ASME specs are the same.  We produce our steel to the ASTM specs and dual certify to ASME when the customer requests.

In the case of A516 GR 70 the ASTM allows for higher Manganese if the Carbon is lower.  The '04 version of ASME does not allow this Manganese/Carbon trade off.  I was hoping that ASME would have made this change in a new version since we have some A516 GR 70 which conforms to ASTM but not ASME.

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

I just got my hands on Addenda 2006. SA515 not updated. Still identical with A516-90.
Konrad

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

So, coming back to our checki of the footnote on SA516.
My advise is simple: if the spec says SA 516 - that is the spec to use. If the material is dual certified than it is a bonus.
Again, caution against misusing the ASTM in lieu of ASME and confusing the two. They are NOT identical in every respect.

Putting Human Factor Back in Engineering

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

One reason that the ASME specs don't always adopt ASTM changes is that they must take into account weldability, strength at elevated temperature, as well as creap and stress rupture properties.
If the impact of a chemistry change is unknown, then it won't be accepted.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Rust never sleeps
Neither should your protection
http://www.trent-tube.com/contact/Tech_Assist.cfm

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

I think that ASME can be correct in not including the change over/trade in chem comp.
it means that the A mat. trade is as is w/o the changes in the foot note.
so one should be careful in checking the certification
which shall match the SA material
when A material is supplied.
genb

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

Quote:


The ASME spec. that I have (it's dated) does not have this footnote.  I understand that ASME usually updates their specs to match ASTM and my question is:

Does anyone who has the current ASME see any footnotes etc. like this, concerning manganese?


No, and unless Section II endorses the current Edition of ASTM A 516, you are not permitted to use the material that is out of compliance for Mn.

If you feel strongly about this, try an ASME Code Case.

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

Rustysteel,
Do you know the equivalent ASTM steel for a CSA G40.21 38WT category 3.
Can you tell me where can I find a steel plate distributor for Mexico. One that can supply the CSA steel.

Thanks

RE: Manganese in SA516 vs. A516

(OP)
Augusto,
I was just checking out this site for CSA specs and they don't have any.  I assume it's because this is an American site.

Since there is no accomodation for CSA on this site I'll give you an answer here.

In the CSA spec G40.21 Section 4.1 it states:

"...Materials conforming to ASTM A992/A992 M conform also to this Standard."

I don't actually have the A992 spec so I can't verify if this is true.

If you want something similar than you could try A36 which has similar physical requirements but not chemical.

As for supply in Mexico, I wouldn't know.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources