Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Grade 50 Steel Designation

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
By the time you put in the caveats (supplementary requirements) necessary
for the A572 your better off using the A 992 spec.  That is what we are
doing.  It is what is being manufactured anyway.  And there is no price
differential.  It is the first time that a real carbon equivalent is
specified.  A992 is your friend.

Regards,
Harold Sprague


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Ritter, Mike [SMTP:mritter(--nospam--at)lgt.lg.com]
> Sent:	Monday, May 01, 2000 1:20 PM
> To:	'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
> Subject:	Grade 50 Steel Designation
> 
> Friends,
> 
> We typically put a note on our drawings that says steel (WF shapes) are
> to be ASTM A572, Grade 50.  However, we recently had a peer reviewer say
> that we should probably specify ASTM A992.  
> 
> I spoke with a contact at a local steel fab shop, and he said that the
> 992 is probably more readily available, but is no less expensive than
> the 572.  The 992 is the "dual certification" steel.
> 
> Any comments?  What do you guys specify?  Is there a reason to specify
> one over the other if we're getting 50 ksi either way?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> Michael D. Ritter, PE
>