Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Any low carbone steel dealer in USA 2
- Thread starter avocadozo
- Start date
-
1
- #2
For plain carbon steels (such as AISI 1010), it is very difficult finding anything other than AISI 1018 (also called CRS for Cold Rolled Steel). There aren't as many vendors making steel anymore and the remaining ones seem to focus only on a few alloys.
One can purchase specific grades from Carpenter, but the minimum lot sizes are enormous.
Your best alternative is to use 1018 steel and have it annealed. It only has a bit more carbon than 1010, is much more available and will have nearly equal magnetic properties.
One can purchase specific grades from Carpenter, but the minimum lot sizes are enormous.
Your best alternative is to use 1018 steel and have it annealed. It only has a bit more carbon than 1010, is much more available and will have nearly equal magnetic properties.
- Thread starter
- #3
EdStainless
Materials
There is a lot of 1002 ELI made for appliance housings, but as far as I know it is all made as sheet, no bar.
Use 1018 and give the parts an extended hydrogen anneal. You can actually remove C that way.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Corrosion never sleeps, but it can be managed.
Use 1018 and give the parts an extended hydrogen anneal. You can actually remove C that way.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Corrosion never sleeps, but it can be managed.
- Thread starter
- #5
-
1
- #6
There is a lot of A36 available. Find some with certs that show low carbon. What I've checked has been fine. I know there is a risk for some other reason it won't be. But I'm allowing it's use. Not much other choice.
Have you considered higher carbon steels and it's effects on your circuit. It may not be a problem.
Maybe you need to redesign your circuit for 1020 or higher carbon steel.
Have you considered higher carbon steels and it's effects on your circuit. It may not be a problem.
Maybe you need to redesign your circuit for 1020 or higher carbon steel.
- Thread starter
- #7
avacadozo: You asked about silicon steel. It has a lower saturation flux density than plain low carbon steel. However, silicon steel does have advantages if your electromagnet is going to operate in AC mode.
So, the question becomes: What do you intend for your electromagnet to do? Please describe your application in a bit more detail.
So, the question becomes: What do you intend for your electromagnet to do? Please describe your application in a bit more detail.
- Thread starter
- #9
My operation mode is in DC. However, depending on situation, DC signal should be changed frequently.
I though AISI 1010. However, AISI 1010 is not avaible to me because I couldn't find any vendor to sell rod-type AISI 1010. So I need to think a subsitution for AISI 1010.
I heard that silicon steel has almost same permeability and saturation density as pure steel. Is that wrong?
If correct, can somebody tell me any vendor to sell silicon steel?
Anyway, thanks to all reply for my question.
I though AISI 1010. However, AISI 1010 is not avaible to me because I couldn't find any vendor to sell rod-type AISI 1010. So I need to think a subsitution for AISI 1010.
I heard that silicon steel has almost same permeability and saturation density as pure steel. Is that wrong?
If correct, can somebody tell me any vendor to sell silicon steel?
Anyway, thanks to all reply for my question.
If you cannot consider higher carbon steels then you don't want to consider silicon steels or pure iron. There would be higher losses with these then with 1020 steel.
What is the highest flux density in your circuit? As MagMike said we could help more with more info.
Changing a DC signal frequently is probably only an issue when begins to look like an AC signal. Unless the time constant is an issue.
These people can help if you do a google search for
Samuel Specialty Metals
What is the highest flux density in your circuit? As MagMike said we could help more with more info.
Changing a DC signal frequently is probably only an issue when begins to look like an AC signal. Unless the time constant is an issue.
These people can help if you do a google search for
Samuel Specialty Metals
- Thread starter
- #11
If your flux path is short where you have 2T then losses in higher carbon steel will not be significantly greater.
.6-.7T in an small air gap is relatively easy to obtain. But again to help you more we need details. And perhaps you cannot release them.
Have you determined the difference in losses with different steels. Usually we are talking about single digit percentage point changes when going from 1010 to 1020 to 1028 to 1035 steel. Although it does add up.
.6-.7T in an small air gap is relatively easy to obtain. But again to help you more we need details. And perhaps you cannot release them.
Have you determined the difference in losses with different steels. Usually we are talking about single digit percentage point changes when going from 1010 to 1020 to 1028 to 1035 steel. Although it does add up.
Well I don't mean to stray from the original topic of this thread, but I thought that iron had higher saturation than any carbon steel. Isn't that why pure iron is often used for the pole pieces? I guess I need to find some good charts with the curves shown for these materials, but I'd still be interested to hear what you have to say.
-Todd
-Todd
MJR2,
I'd be interested in seeing the charts that you use. Do they provide the chemical composition of the iron, compared with 1020? How about cold-working?
The only way I can envision iron (I'm assuming pure iron) having higher losses than 1020 is for the iron to be heavily cold-worked, or the 1020 to be annealed. Annealed iron should have less losses than annealed 1020.
The carbon and manganese content in 10XX series steels have significant effects in impeding the magnetization process. Assuming the iron is "pure", there will be less to hinder the magnetization and thus the losses should be lower.
I'd be interested in seeing the charts that you use. Do they provide the chemical composition of the iron, compared with 1020? How about cold-working?
The only way I can envision iron (I'm assuming pure iron) having higher losses than 1020 is for the iron to be heavily cold-worked, or the 1020 to be annealed. Annealed iron should have less losses than annealed 1020.
The carbon and manganese content in 10XX series steels have significant effects in impeding the magnetization process. Assuming the iron is "pure", there will be less to hinder the magnetization and thus the losses should be lower.
Okay. Well we are off track but I'll try to finish.
There are a lot of references. One might be the ASM Metals Handbook. And I see that you are right. Except what I was really considering was cast iron and steel. Pure iron annealed is better than than low carbon rolled steels. In any case commercially the low carbon rolled (hot and cold)steels is where I design. I see the comments about annealing and will need to keep that in my back pocket.
As the thread started it is getting harder to get good low carbon steels. A few years ago 1018 and lower was common. We slipped to 1020 and now 1022. Since all of these have a range of properties on any given day you might not be able to measure a difference in your completed magnetic assembly. Certs are encouraged before I allow lower specs.
If you wonder why steel is hard to get one only has to see the construction in China to really understand. Absolutely incredible.
Plus you have so many other things which can make your design go south. We drilled into a 2" thick plate of steel 3/4" and struck oil (transformer oil filled magnet). The plate was porous. I have to imagine it adversly effected the measured field. But the inspection results could not suggest any problem. If it had not come up to the design field strength how would I have ever known why. And yes I know there are inspection techniques for steel that would reveal this. But I like to think I design practical cost efficent magnetic devices and because of that make some sweeping assumptions. And most of the time it works.
There are a lot of references. One might be the ASM Metals Handbook. And I see that you are right. Except what I was really considering was cast iron and steel. Pure iron annealed is better than than low carbon rolled steels. In any case commercially the low carbon rolled (hot and cold)steels is where I design. I see the comments about annealing and will need to keep that in my back pocket.
As the thread started it is getting harder to get good low carbon steels. A few years ago 1018 and lower was common. We slipped to 1020 and now 1022. Since all of these have a range of properties on any given day you might not be able to measure a difference in your completed magnetic assembly. Certs are encouraged before I allow lower specs.
If you wonder why steel is hard to get one only has to see the construction in China to really understand. Absolutely incredible.
Plus you have so many other things which can make your design go south. We drilled into a 2" thick plate of steel 3/4" and struck oil (transformer oil filled magnet). The plate was porous. I have to imagine it adversly effected the measured field. But the inspection results could not suggest any problem. If it had not come up to the design field strength how would I have ever known why. And yes I know there are inspection techniques for steel that would reveal this. But I like to think I design practical cost efficent magnetic devices and because of that make some sweeping assumptions. And most of the time it works.
A star for MJR2 for clearing things up and especially for relating the story about the porous plate of steel. I always try to leave a bit of a "cushion" in my magnet designs. Your post just encouraged me to use a bigger cushion when designing with larger plates of steel.
- Thread starter
- #20
I learn from this forum the annealing will improve the magnetic property of the carbon steel. So I want to do that.
My question is that when is proper annealing time and that what temperature is set for annealing? In my case, I will machine the core part. To better magnetic performance, after machining the core part, I shoud have it annealed? And what is proper setting temperature for annealing?
My question is that when is proper annealing time and that what temperature is set for annealing? In my case, I will machine the core part. To better magnetic performance, after machining the core part, I shoud have it annealed? And what is proper setting temperature for annealing?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question