FR10 equivalent FR10 equivalent rivtim (Automotive) (OP) 17 Jan 08 10:17 I have a print specifying FR10 for a cold headed part. I am looking for the SAE or ANSI equivalent to FR10. RE: FR10 equivalent CoryPad (Materials) 17 Jan 08 14:04 FR10 is a designation for wire rod according to AFNOR NF A35-053 Fil machine en acier non allié pour fabrications réalisées par formage à chaud ou à froid - Qualités. SAE only has standards for alloy designations (like SAE J403) or mechanical properties of fasteners (like SAE J1199). For composition, grades 1006 and 1010 in SAE J403 would be close (but not equivalent). However, there are requirements other than composition that are important and not specified in J403, so you must consider those.I don't understand why you don't ask the customer for more information about the parts you are quoting. If they gave you a part drawing, and you have questions, why don't you contact your customer?Lastly, this is about the 10th time on this site that you have requested information regarding substitution of various materials. It seems that it is time for you and your employer to obtain the necessary references to conduct your business. Relying on the collective experience and kindness of strangers seems like a poor practice. Regards,CoryPlease see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora. RE: FR10 equivalent rivtim (Automotive) (OP) 17 Jan 08 15:46 Thanks Cory, Most of the time, my customer is in the same boat that I am. They are given a rush RFQ with prints and specifications in another language and no supporting documentation. I try to offer them an available substitute but make it very clear that we do not guarantee that substitute meets the given specification. Ultimately it is up to some engineer in a tier 2 or 3 supplier to determine if that substitution will meet their needs. We simply clearly specify what we are quoting and I use Eng-Tips as one of many ways to get to the nearest available substitute. It is the tenth time in two years that I have used this site. The first time in 6 months. I am my employer and know how much it would cost to fill a room with all of the neccessary documentation to "know it all". Then, I wouldn't have the time to find what I need anyway for an RFQ that I have a 3% chance of getting an order out of. Sorry about the attitude but the emoticons don't seem to cut it. RE: FR10 equivalent CoryPad (Materials) 17 Jan 08 16:52 Well down the food chain, hmm? I can't argue that things can be difficult, it just seems like a lack of information will limit your chances to bid successfully. Eng-Tips is a great resource, just one that should be used for guidance only. Good luck with your future bids.I think you should consider a couple, relatively low-cost, references. These probably will cover 90% of what you will need except for proprietary standards from companies like GM, Toyota, etc.Stahlschlüssel, published by Verlag Stahlschlüssel Wegst and available here:http://www.stahlschluessel.de/en/home.htmlWorldwide Guide to Equivalent Irons and Steels, 5th Edition, published by ASM International and available here:http://asmcommunity.asminternational.org/portal/site/asm/ Regards,CoryPlease see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora. RE: FR10 equivalent rharr (Mechanical) 5 Feb 08 14:45 Cory,If you were to purchase a single reference book for the comparison of international steel designations, which would it be?StahlschlüsselWorldwide Guide to Equivalent Irons and Steels, 5th Edition, published by ASM InternationalOr ASTM's Handbook of Comparative World Steel Standards: Fourth EditionAny of these may be considered to be “relatively low-cost reference” to some. To me, spending $200 to over $400 on a book I’ll use a few times a year is a chunk of change. RE: FR10 equivalent rivtim (Automotive) (OP) 5 Feb 08 15:50 rharr, I have recently purchased the "Worldwide guide" recommended by Corypad. It so far has been an excellent reference book that is quite easy to navigate. I can't comment on Stahlschlüssel as I have not yet seen that book. RE: FR10 equivalent rharr (Mechanical) 6 Feb 08 17:28 Thank you, rivtimCan you tell me what it says about steel DIN 1.8550. I've been confused with what I've found in my searches and, according to the index that's accessible through the ASM website, it's not in there.Some sites tell me it includes nickel. Others indicate it doesn'tThis has been my dilemma regarding this purchase. I haven't found a single source with everything I need. Our customer's prints come from all over the world and some of the materials called out are obsolete references. RE: FR10 equivalent TVP (Materials) 7 Feb 08 09:56 rharr,Grade 34CrAlNi7-10 (1.8550) appears in the old DIN standard DIN 17211 (as 34CrAlNi7) and in the current Euronorm standard DIN EN 10085. The exact composition is as follows:C = 0.30-0.37Si = 0.40 maxMn = 0.40-0.70P = 0.025 maxS = 0.035 maxCr = 1.50-1.80Mo = 0.15-0.25Ni = 0.85-1.15Al = 0.80-1.20Regarding the best cross-referencing resource, it is difficult for me to narrow down the list to only one. All three of the items that you mentioned have been recently revised, and are quite thorough and easy-to-use. I would probably default to the ASM guide over the other two if forced to pick only one. RE: FR10 equivalent rharr (Mechanical) 7 Feb 08 11:14 Thank you, TVPThis was very helpful.An old saying that seems to apply to me more than I'd like is, "A man with one watch always knows what time it is. A man with two is never sure."I was fine with the composition you just provided until I stumbled on one without the nickel. It grouped four steels in EN10085:2001: 1.8505, 1.8507, 1.8550 and 1.8509. Only 1.8509 included the nickel. Levels of C, Cr, and Mo varied slightly between them. RE: FR10 equivalent TVP (Materials) 7 Feb 08 14:23 FYI, all four grades still appear in DIN EN 10085, and only 1.8550 contains Ni. The grade 1.8509 is just a higher C version of 1.8505. RE: FR10 equivalent rharr (Mechanical) 7 Feb 08 16:09 Interesting. Must be a typo on the face of that second watch. I thought it was odd that they were out of order.Thank you.