General purpose steel

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Martin

Textron [predictably] seems to have a better understanding than most: **LINK**

Jenifer Hearly

… It looks to me like the norm has become ‘leaded’ and you need to specify ‘non-leaded’ if that’s required.

MichaelG.

[Clive FosterParticipant @clivefoster55965]

The major problem for folk like us is that no-one has made EN steels for donkeys years.

What you get when ordering by EN numbers is your suppliers interpretation of a steel with sufficiently similar properties to be considered equivalent. Usually our suppliers are pretty careful to give us something reasonable but further up the chain you can get some right rubbish. Larger suppliers tend to consider folk still using EN numbers to be very unsophisticated users. Almost to the if it welds or if it bends it will do!

I got cured of EN numbers when I bought 3 bars of EN something (can't recall which) form a local stock holder and got three clearly different materials.

Steels can be got certificated for composition and specification. If buying by specification only the headline properties will match. So tensile strength might match but machinability can be very different.

You really should use the modern terminology which is primarily based on composition automatically limiting the scope for confusion or error.

The best short reference I've ever seen is the table in Volume 2 of John Bradleys three book series "The Racing Motorcycle" a technical guid for constructors. Its an excellent summary of properties of widely available steels suitable for different purposes. The whole chapter on steels is a very good introduction to the properties and types at a practical level. Enough detail to select the right stuff for the job whilst explaining why its the right stuff. My copy falls open at that table because I've looked at it so often to make sure I'm getting the correct thing.

I wonder if John could be persuaded to do a re-write as a magazine series for we Model Engineer and Home Workshop types.

Clive

[Martin KyteParticipant @martinkyte99762]

Smiths Metal centres cannot be accused of being a small model engineering supplier they are commercial and they classify their steels by EN numbers. They do also specify the modern tags so I’m not convinced by this ‘out of date’ talk. Steel is made to a composition, how you choose to represent it doesn’t matter to the steel.
Steel types must have evolved into preferred specs over time. Changing from EN to SAE designation will not have changed the individual mix so I’m not sure how you can say no one produces EN steel anymore.
It’s like saying no one makes 8 by 4 chipboard it’s all 2440×1220.

regards Martin

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Clive Foster on 27/12/2022 10:05:42:

The major problem for folk like us is that no-one has made EN steels for donkeys years.

What you get when ordering by EN numbers is your suppliers interpretation of a steel with sufficiently similar properties to be considered equivalent….

Confusion abounds, and poor old grandad, not realising he's bought the wrong specification, is liable to assume all modern steel is of inferior quality. Steel was wonderful when I was a boy.

A quick look at five UK web suppliers revealed that when asked for EN1a they provide 230M07, a steel in which free-cutting is achieved by adding Sulphur and Lead. 230M07 is a common substitution, therefore, folk are liable to believe EN1a contains Lead. Unfortunately it's not guaranteed. The original EN1A of 1955 was free-cutting due to Sulphur, with no Lead. Modern equivalents of this variant are also supplied as 'EN1A'.

Sulphur only 'EN1A' is noticeably more free-cutting than ordinary mild-steels and Leaded EN1A machines even better. However, unleaded sulphur only EN1A is cheaper, slightly stronger, and easier to weld, though the finish may be a little rough. Against that, cutting tools last longer on Leaded EN1A and there are fewer finish rejects. In industry, the most appropriate alloy is thoughtfully chosen by the designer or production engineer. What's the cheapest way of meeting requirements? Not 'I think I know what EN1A is!'

We're stuck with EN numbers because they've become a bad habit. Large numbers of untrained users and local metal emporia passed the system down through the generations. The internet is starting to break EN numbers because an online shop doesn't depend on prejudices – it can say what the alloy really is! I expect it will still take several decades though…

Dave

Dave

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Martin Kyte on 27/12/2022 10:30:59:

[…]

It’s like saying no one makes 8 by 4 chipboard it’s all 2440×1220.

.

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 27/12/2022 11:22:24:

Posted by Clive Foster on 27/12/2022 10:05:42:

………

A quick look at five UK web suppliers revealed that when asked for EN1a they provide 230M07, a steel in which free-cutting is achieved by adding Sulphur and Lead. 230M07 is a common substitution, therefore, folk are liable to believe EN1a contains Lead. Unfortunately it's not guaranteed. The original EN1A of 1955 was free-cutting due to Sulphur, with no Lead. Modern equivalents of this variant are also supplied as 'EN1A'.

Dave

Dave

The modern designation for leaded steel is 230M07Pb. If it hasn't got the Pb it shouldn't have any lead. Trouble is that many ME suppliers don't understand, or don't care. I've even had one trying to sell me 'GCQ' steel, which he claimed stood for good commercial quality. To me it meant he had lost the certificate. I'm not suggesting that ME suppliers should provide a cert, but they should correctly advertise what they are selling. They will have bought it from an industrial supplier, and you can't avoid getting a cert from the ones I've dealt with, it's part of their QA system

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

I've also been told by one ME supplier that SAE 660 bronze doesn't have lead in it. Just look at the online data sheet.

[Author]

Posts