I could have sworn Dexter was the P.I. on that one.
3DDave's referenced article is here:
Bartlett, F. Michael; Dexter, Robert J.; Graeser, Mark D.; Jelinek, Jason J.; Schmidt, Bradley J.; Galambos, Theodore V. (2003). "
Updating Standard Shape Material Properties Database for Design and Reliability," Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 40, pp. 2-14. (currently a free download as of 7/2/24, should one want a slightly shorter version of the research paper)
Met33's referenced article is here:
Lee, Jinwoo; Engelhardt, Michael D.; Taleff, Eric M. (2012). "
Mechanical Properties of ASTM A992 Steel After Fire," Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 49, pp. 33-44. (currently a free download as of 7/2/24)
On the fire exposure side of things, Jinwoo references Tide which is a pretty cogent article:
Tide, Raymond H.R. (1998). "
Integrity of Structural Steel After Exposure to Fire," Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 35, pp. 26-38. currently a free download as of 7/2/24)
Nobody asked, but I figured the links would be useful to at least one person sometime in the next forty years.
As a side note, that 0.2% offset is more typically associated with Aluminum and various alloys of Aluminum as they lack a distinct yield point. Steel has a distinct yield point, upper and lower, and I have no idea what the OP means when they mention es = 0.002. es isn't ey, anyway, much ado about a rather daffy question.
We are going to be "stuck" with E = 29,000 ksi for a good while. Unless something really odd happens technologically on the material science side of things. I would happily argue once we don't have "steel" with an E = 29,000 ksi, we aren't dealing with steel anymore.