EN 10025 Gr S235 Steel

[TLHS]

I have a client bringing skidded equipment into Canada from Europe. I'm doing a quick evaluation of the vendor's design methodology to make sure it generally complies with local requirements. They're using Canadian design codes and EN rated steels. I'm not overly concerned, because they're assuming a very low strength material that appears to just be bog standard mild steel. It's graded S235, which is a yield of 235MPa / 34ksi. The metallurgy is low carbon and I don't expect a welding problem unless there's something incompatible with our welding code that I'm not expecting. I can't see an issue with it.

The combined safety factors between the Eurocode and S16 appear reasonably similar, which would imply that variability is similar between our materials (EN 1993 has lower or negligible resistance factors on the materials, but load factors are slightly higher to the point where things are pretty similar)

I also suspect that the material they're using to build will have higher strength than their conservative design assumption, but I'm just concerned with evaluating their methodology.

Anyone who does work across jurisdictions see anything off in my assumptions here? For our American friends, Canadian codes are generally compatible with US structural steels, so feel free to have opinions regarding EN steels and US codes.

 

[robyengIT]

1 - Eurocodes -

https://eurocodes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

(let me know in detail the infos of your interest)

2 - material : handbook of comparative world steel standards - ASTM DS67D

 

[HTURKAK]

Having experience with Eurocodes and cold region , my opinion is;

- Rather than refined calculation for comparison,

- I would check for toughness requirements S 235 steel could be JR , J0, and J2 .. ,

- I would compare the design loads with local wind and seismic ..



My opinion,






I cannot give you the formula for success, but I can give you the formula for failure..It is: Try to please everybody.

 

[human909]

I'm Australian. So I can't comment thoroughly on US/Canada or EU. But I will comment regardless! [flush]

However I would say that from what I've seen the EU codes are excellent. They seem well written, comprehensive and readily interpretable. They also have the advantage of being built ground up as limit state codes rather than being hamstrung by tradition with ASD and imperial units.

All that said, the US and Canada do seem to have active structural code communities that put good work into their codes. The Australian codes fit somewhere in between IMO, but they do often lag with updates.


Just one question. Where is the "lower or negligible resistance factors on the materials" that you are seeing. From what I can see EU has a PHI of 0.9 similar to Canada. Or is my googling failing?