×
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

Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

(OP)
I am a structural engineer that has only worked here in the US with steel shapes from the AISC manual. I have been asked to look at an existing structure that was built/designed in 1986 with metric shapes. I have been able to find information on the dimensions of the members, but I have not been able to determine what yield strength would have been used for this steel. Would it be similar to ASTM A36 (Fy = 36 ksi)? Does anyone have information on what steel strengths would have been used for metric shapes in 1986 and before? IPE, HE, and HI (i believe these are built-up plate sections) shapes.

Thank you in advance for your help..

RE: Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

What country are we talking about?

RE: Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

When our ASIC standard rolled shape designs using 36000 yield were actually supplied by a Japanese mill for ultimate construction on site in Saudi Arabia, they also used 36,000, however the JP shape dimensions actually could vary slightly by a mm or two or three to the positive side. Plate yield strength could vary as I recall (perhaps up to 54ksi) , so if you can't positively identify the actual spec used, I would recommend that you obtain a sample and test it.

RE: Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

(OP)
The design was done by a firm in Finland

RE: Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

Sorry, in what country is the structure located?

If "here in the US" also means the structure is in the US, then A36 is a reasonable lower bound for strength properties in that time period (probably for anything after the mid 1960s). If you need additional metallurgical information (e.g. for welding) or an upper bound on yield strength (e.g. for dynamic/seismic response), testing will be required.

RE: Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

(OP)
yes, the structure is here in the states... i just assumed that since it was designed overseas and metric shapes were used, then it was fabricated overseas as well.

RE: Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

Hmm.. I assumed that wouldn't be economical, but it depends on the type and size of structure. Can you give us a little more information about that?

Pending more information, I'd still be pretty confident assuming A36 in the meantime, and potentially requiring verification before submitting anything final (given the same caveats above).

RE: Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

In Canada in 1980 to the present, the standard structural steel would have been G40.21-M300W for Channels, Angles and Wide flange beams; G40.21-M350W for Hollow Steel Sections. The M signifies metric series and the 300 or 350 is the yield stress in MPa which would correspond to 43,500 and 50,750 psi respectively. Plate material could be ordered in 300 MPa as well but A36 was commonly stocked in 1986 and earlier.

I would think it unlikely to find metric steel shapes with yield stress as low as 36,000 in 1986 but testing is probably the safest way to find out for certain.

BA

RE: Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

(OP)
The building houses a vertical boiler in Georgia. The boiler and its structure were designed by a consultant in Finland. My understanding is that the boiler and its structure were a replica of a design that was previously completed by that same company. Because the design was practically a “copy” of a previous design, the Boiler and its structure was provided to the client as a “package” deal. It appears that the boiler was fabricated by a company, Tampella, in Finland, which is why I assumed the steel was fabricated overseas as well. The design was reviewed and stamped by a local engineer. My company is trying to determine how much additional live load can be placed in different areas without overstressing members. We were given an incomplete set of drawings and it does not include any notes with material strengths. I was hoping to find literature that gave me common material that was used in Finland in the early to mid-1980s. If the steel was fabricated here in the States during that time period I would be comfortable assuming A36 steel was used, however I not sure if that assumption would be true for steel fabricated in Europe. Thank you again for all your help…

RE: Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

Quote (dachedo)

... i just assumed that since it was designed overseas and metric shapes were used...

Reread BigInch's post; that steel could be EITHER US sizes/grades or metric sizes/grades AND have been produced and fabricated overseas.

In 1999 we were having a packaged combined cycle (vertical boiler) electric generating unit designed. There was a lump sum option to use either all traditional US sizes/grades or all metric sizes/grades. We went with the metric steel for the cost savings. I argued against doing this for the very reason you are dealing with (future changes)... but, in reality the cost savings were really significant.

www.SlideRuleEra.net idea
www.VacuumTubeEra.net r2d2

RE: Yield Strength for 1986 Metric Steel Shapes

if you assume fy = 235 MPa that would be a safe bet.
When you order S235 material, half of the time you get the question from your supplier that they have the same profiles but in a higher quality in stock (S275), "can we sell you those instead for the same price?"
S235 and S275 are very commonly used in Europe for construction.
S355 as well, but costs more, and requires more workmanship, especially when welding is involved.

http://www.fusionpoint.be
http://be.linkedin.com/in/fusionpoint

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