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

Re: Reinforcing

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
The majority of steel is made from recycled material, however, that does
not completely define the composition of the steel, at least not in the
US.  The steel has to meet the requirements of the properties defined in
the ASTM standards, and the recycled material is only one component that
is used to make a particular steel.  "Billet-steel" basically defines a
process.  Most steel is cast into "billets" or "blooms" initially. I'm
not sure of the exact dimensions but I think a billet is the rang of a
4"x4" solid cross section; I think blooms are bigger, maybe 6"x6".  The
rebar is then processed from the billets.  Because it comes from a
billet does mean that it is brittle or non-weldable.  Here in the US
both A615 and A706 rebar are made from "billet-steel".  A615 is not
weldable, A706 is weldable.  Neither are brittle.

Neil Glaser, P.E.


vicpeng wrote:

> Here's one that should perhaps have Canadian engineers questioning.
> Maybe the list in general can educate me. In the concrete standard CSA
> A23.3-94 under Clause 1.3 "Reference Publications" we have the
> following. CAN/CSA-G30.18-M92: Billet-Steel for Concrete
> Reinforcing My understanding is that "billet-steel" is steel made from
> re-cycled steel products and that the composition is such that the
> steel is relatively brittle and also not weldable.  If that is the
> case why do we accept this as is the steel to use for Limit States
> Design with respect to getting plastic deformations or ductilities
> that allow the assumptions attached to the attainment of fy?  Why
> don't we use "weldable steels" that are more malleable for reinforcing
> bars?
> Thor A Tandy P.Eng, MCSCE
> Victoria BC
> Canada
> e-mail: vicpeng(--nospam--at)vtcg.com