Bolt material (US vs the world) 4

[Struct71]

All,

We are a globally operating company who order bolts (and other materials) regularly. Upon client request or upon availablity, we sometimes order UN size bolting and sometimes order metric size bolting.


In USA we order UN bolting according to ASTM A193 or ASTM A320.

In WOUSA we order metric bolting usually 8.8 or 10.9 quality (don't remember exactly what code).



Now here there is someone who claims that even metric bolting should be ordered with the american ASTM A193 material. I can't find anything about it on internet, and all books that are referenced date from 20 years ago.

To me it seems a little strange, it is like ordering a Ford Passat or a Volkswagen Focus. I am sure if you insist that you would be able to get it.


What is the latest standard for indicating material for metric bolting?

Cheers,

 

[CoryPad]

The ASTM standards are dual units, so they can be used for inch or metric products. If the high or low temperature properties of the fasteners are important, then you should be specifying the ASTM standards or their equivalent. They are more expensive but have guarantees on the properties that basic ISO 898-1 (which covers property classes 8.8 and 10.9) does not. These guarantees cost extra, so expect to pay more for them.

 

[kingnero]

As a European customer, I don't think that there is anything wrong with the european standards nor with the bolts itself,
I'm quite sure you won't encounter any problems ordering Euro bolts with euro specs using euro norms.

I deal with a large manufacturer of fasteners on a more than regular basis, and I'll listen whether or not they deliver according to the USA standards (ASTM), but I doubt so... and yet they deliver throughout the world.

 

[CoryPad]

kingnero,

There is nothing wrong with European standards. The equivalent to ASTM A 193M and ASTM A 320M is EN 10269, not ISO 898-1. I think you will find that the ASTM standards are very common globally.

 

[kingnero]

I did not mean to say that, I just doubt you'll find metric bolt sizes that are spec'ed according to ASTM standards.
The Euro (which practically means german) standards are very demanding as well, so you'll get top quality either way.
What I meant is, I don't see the benefit of specifying metric bolts according to the ASTM standard.

 

[Struct71]

All,

Thanks for your responses.

Apparently we have been ordering metric bolting according to ASTM A193 for a few months now, and we are getting something supplied to us. I don't hear the accountants complaining that the prices have gone up and I don't hear the purchasers complaining that the delivery time has gone up.

So I am wondering, are we really getting M48 ASTM A193 bolting, or are they just smiling at us while we are there and laughing out loud when we are gone?

 

[JStephen]

It seems to me that if you're ordering to ASTM A193 and don't know why, there may be cheaper alternatives for the US bolts as well; you may be over-specced on them.

 

[vthomidis]

....my guess is that your supplier provides you with metric allright and just ignores your mention of ASTM.

It is quite common for many vendors,when the specification is well
and widely known (e.g. quality 8.8 or 10.9) to provide that under the normal and commonly used standard (EN in this case ) and avoid further discussion, objections etc..

That is the trend in Europe, I don't know if in USA is different..

 

[CoryPad]

Struct71,

Very likely you are getting what you are asking for. This is a common standard, even for metric fasteners.


kingnero,

Specifying ASTM A 193 instead of ISO 898-1 provides a HUGE benefit for high temperature resistance; ASTM A 193 instead of EN 10269, essentially zero benefit.


vthomidis,

Parts that meet EN 10269 can meet ASTM A 193, so supplying those parts is not "ignoring" the original standard. Supplying parts to ISO 898-1 instead of ASTM A 193 or EN 10269 would be ignoring the customer's request.

 

[TVP]

CoryPad is correct, metric fasteners frequently are supplied according to ASTM A193M and ASTM A320M. The offshore/oil and gas industry have regularly referenced these standards, including European based organizations like NORSOK and DNV.

 

[OSIRIS7]

Difficulties you might find are when you have to calculate at elevated temperatures. The yield strengths given bij ASTM/ASME can not be interchanged with EN and vice versa.

En update to the material standard EN 10269: please, bear in mind that this is the standard for the starting material. This standard does not explain i.e. the forming process, heat treatments etc. EuroNorms are NOT complete at this issue and therefore I recommend looking at the additional AD Merkblatt W7 2008-05.

 

[kingnero]

CoryPad,

I did not know that, I've never been near hi-temp applications.
I'll certainly ask our manufacturer for his opinion about that, I'd like to know if he delivers according to ASTM A 193.

Thanks for that - it might come in handy sometime.