×
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

material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

(OP)
My international supplier is substituting S355 for A572 grade 50 that was originally specified. I am running through the properties and noticed that the S355 has higher Mn, Si, Cu and N values at 1.6%, .55max,.55max,.012max (respectively) compared to 1.35%, .40,0,0.


I believe this is a standard substitution but I wanted to double check.

If this is ok, at what point should a structural engineer actually start to question if a material substitute is acceptable?  

RE: material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

stillfan;
There is no such concept as a "standard substitution", when it comes to metals or other materials. You should be evaluating the original material specification, which lists the applicable Grade or Type of steel and compare with the substitute material specification,  Grade or Type. As part of this engineering review you need to evaluate specified mechanical properties and use at design service temperature.
 

RE: material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

S355 is the yield strength.  What are the grade designators that come after it?

Steve Jones
Materials & Corrosion Engineer

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/83b/b04
 

RE: material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

(OP)

I did compare the two and found the differences as noted above. My question as to rather the chemical composition of the S355 having a Mn content of nearly .25% more than the A572 is still in question.  Also the Si,Cu and N values of the S355 are higher than the A572.

I am not sure what the Cu,Si,Mn and N composition does to the steel. As a structural engineer the Carbon content and CVN results are always the main concern but that is within an acceptable margins.   

RE: material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

stillfan,

Steve Jones is correct, there should be some additional characters after the S355, e.g. S355MC according to BS EN 10149-2.  The chemical composition differences are relatively minor between the two standards within the context of conventional structural engineering.

RE: material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

(OP)
Yeah, there are additional characters but they all have relatively the same chemical composition and they didn't give me these characters so I was just assuming worst case scenario where there are larger discrepancies btwn the two materials.

Thank you all.  

RE: material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

Additional characters could be JR, J0 u/i J6 meaning charpy impact tested with minimum value as specified. Normally you can expect character G following with an number telling the material if (fully) killed. Also the S355 material can be produced by different fabrication (rolling) proceses (M-TM-N) that all have other properties.

RE: material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

So to me the question boils down to why did you specify SA572 Gr 50 in the first place, and does this substitute material meet those requirements?

rmw

RE: material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

Sorry, I guess I should have finished my thought before hitting the 'submit' button.

I regularly specify A572-50 (ignore the "S" above - just habit) for a very specific reason and the  requirement that drives me to A572-50 would be the very first one I would check on any material submitted for substitution.  If it met that, then I'd look at the rest.

I'm finished now.

rmw

RE: material specification substitution of S355 for A572 grade 50 question

Just something to consider outside of the design criteria - arbitrarily substituting materials can often create nightmares for the fabricator who has procedures and specifications to follow that are based on the more common ASTM or SA spec materials.
 

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