The 0.150 Mn content needs to be expressed in percentage to compare with the SA material specification chemical composition ranges. Go back and review how all of the alloy element amounts are reported, starting with carbon content. I have seen some MTR’s requiring a multiplier for percentage amount based on how carbon content is reported.
Wow, never seen such a disregard for decimal points and/or multipliers on a test certificate before. From the numbers shown for chemistry, it appears they are using multipliers of 100 and 1000, hence 150 for Mn turns into either 1.5 or .15 (both out of range for this grade). Are multipliers listed at the bottom of the sheet?
There we go, I figured there had to be multipliers at the bottom. Not sure which ASTM you ordered, but for A516 the Mn is high (max of 1.20 or 1.30 depending on heat or product analysis).
The CE numbers reported are acceptable for this plate material based on ASME SA 20, Table 2. This material does not conform to the ASME SA 516 material specification because as mentioned above the Mn content of 1.5% is above the maximum acceptable for either heat or product analysis of 1.2 or 1.3%, respectively.
Mn is accetable up to 1,50% since Edition 2004 of ASTM A516 resp. Edition 2007 of ASME. In the MTC, ASME IIA Edition 2010 is given (footnote B of table 1).
A Nb of 0,05% can be agreed according ASTM A 20 Table 1 footnote D.
The multiplier of the different elements is given in the bottom line below the chemical composition.
As you have the adress of the material manufacturer why not asking them directly in case of doubts?
I must have reviewed and earlier edition of SA 516. SA 516 from the 2011 Edition/Addendum and the footnote is below;
(B) For each reduction of 0.01 percentage point below the specified maximum for carton, an increase of 0.06 percentage point above the specified maximum for manganese is permitted, up to a maximum of 1.50% by heat analysis and 1.60% by product analysis.
Perfectly good certificate, and note it is 3.2 - Lloyd's Register. It's not often that both manufacturer and inspection agency in that part of the world get it wrong and sign for it.
