What's new
What's new
By:
Advanced search…

For guys that order a lot of A36. Much $/lb difference in C channel vs L angle?

H

huleo

Hot Rolled
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Location
UT
I think we have narrowed our supplier list for some production work but it has been realized in engineering that the design may be better suited using C channel instead of of the proposed L angle. I am just curious if C would be considered harder for a mill to make, or otherwise some reason it would be more expensive per lb than angle?

I realize this convo is better directed at the supplier but sometimes getting these simple answers is rather difficult.

I guess while here, I might ask if there are specific geometries beyond what was mentioned above that even more economical?
 
It’s all about quantity. How much will it cost you to process one or the other and what is the difference in price between the two materials. Is your demand large enough to qualify for any discount structures from your supplier. Gotta talk to them to see what they can do for you
 
C, L, UM, and W shapes run same per ton (we buy by ton so guess that is a lot?), MC and architectural angle cost a fortune comparatively. Get multiple quotes, prices fluctuate drastically from different suppliers and mills depending on how sales feels that moment.
 
^^^ Thank you! I wish the suppliers could be that transparent! I would like to get in the know on what is considered "budget steel" vs what is "premium". We don't really play with these very often but for our application, the most important thing to us is just the cross sectional area, which equates to allowable capacities on tension/compression. We, of course, are having to consider the dimensions as well to ensure compression stability.

What I am looking with one supplier is either 'structural, bar, ship, car'. They do not provide the cross sectional specs, just general cross section dims. I guess I can dive into the AISC book and I am sure the stuff is in there, but ultimately, if someone says "try to use from this list, its much cheaper", I am sure we can design for it.

At the moment, we are just seeing some torsional instability issues with L and C looks a bit better on paper.
 
EmanuelGoldstein said:
That one is easy ! "Budget" is everything that couldn't possibly work, while "premium" is anything you might be interested in buying :D
Click to expand...

Man speaks the truth right there! lol

Reminds me of when I buy beer and workers like to ask "well what are you looking for?" I respond, "the fire sales, lets start there".
 
a36 is merchant grade/budget - which is also what most charts are based off, astm 50 is next level- recently all our stock has been dual or triple graded to 75. Steel shapes are general, there is a lot of plus minus in the cross section allowed, big beams run +- 3/8 in web, +-1/4 in flange, with web center being a drunk reading a paper ruler across the room estimate. Small beams are better, usually in the 1/8th realm. They all meet structural loads, tensile and shear, so you can always use the handy charts. Channel and angle is usually closer to spec nominal dimensions.
a single stiffener drastically changes torsional stability of a structural steel shape, not sure I grasp the voodoo of how one can change it so much, but it is drastic.
 
cyanidekid said:
hmm, +- 3/8" well, thats a generous spec! what the hell size W section allows that?
Click to expand...

anything over 27" is big. Heavier beams tend to run tighter, ie 8x13 is better than 8x10, 8x31 is better than 8x13. a noodle 14x22 wont be as tight to nominal as 8x31.
flange and web thickness are always held, that is critical to design strengths.
 
I suspect the design that is lightest while meeting necessary strengths will be the cheapest. For a torsional problem, an enclosed section like pipe or tube may cost a lot more per pound but provide a less expensive completed fabrication.
 
gbent said:
I suspect the design that is lightest while meeting necessary strengths will be the cheapest. For a torsional problem, an enclosed section like pipe or tube may cost a lot more per pound but provide a less expensive completed fabrication.
Click to expand...

Yup, square tube cost's more than round , but the ease of joint details makes up for allot.

Maybe not enough though.

Would really like some idea of what is being designed here.
 
memphisjed said:
anything over 27" is big. Heavier beams tend to run tighter, ie 8x13 is better than 8x10, 8x31 is better than 8x13. a noodle 14x22 wont be as tight to nominal as 8x31.
flange and web thickness are always held, that is critical to design strengths.
Click to expand...
Yup, didja ever see that stuff exiting the rolling mill, red hot and snaking along the cooling rollers ? A wet noodle has nothing on it.

Surprised it's straight enough in 40' to fit on the truck...:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Broaching a Bolt Action Reciever, Raceways, Lugways, ya someone had to do it.
Replies
12
Views
15K
Doug W
D
G&L4nahalf
How to tool up for under 100$
4 5 6
Replies
115
Views
22K
G&L4nahalf
G&L4nahalf
P
Deep Holes with a Difference
Replies
0
Views
5K
PracticalMan
P
P
The Costs and Benefits of Horizontal Machining
Replies
0
Views
5K
PracticalMan
P
P
Presetting Becomes Prevalent
Replies
0
Views
4K
PracticalMan
P








 

ABOUT PRACTICAL MACHINIST

With more than 10.6 million unique visitors over the last year, Practical Machinist is the most visited site for metalworking professionals. Practical Machinist is the easiest way to learn new techniques, get answers quickly and discuss common challenges with your peers. Register for the world’s largest manufacturing technology forum for free today to stay in the know.

Learn more about us.

STAY CONNECTED

Facebook Instagram YouTube LinkedIn Pinterest Twitter Tiktok

Register Become a forum member. Register today.

Sign Up Sign up for our e-newsletter.

© 2024 Copyright Practicalmachinist.com. All Rights reserved.

Back
Top