ML20100E635

Part 21 Rept Re Analysis of Two Carbon Steel Samples 12949A & 12949B Received from Baldwin Assoc.Steel Not from Heat 81177-21 Sold to Interstate Steel.Matl Not Produced by Phoenix Steel Matl Did Not Meet ASTM A-36 Specs

ML20100E635
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	11/12/1984
From:	Brooks R PHOENIX STEEL CORP.
To:	Courtland P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
References
REF-PT21-84 NUDOCS 8412060316
Download: ML20100E635 (2)

Text

f///do$ bWe+*&r,et'poy foc/Gr/ f 0 -- Q ,/

61 PHOENIX 4 STEEL November 12, 1984 f_g CORPORATION

^. 4001 PHILADELPHIA PIKE CLAYMONT, DELAWARE 19703 5 2 (302)798 1411 O TELEX 83-5416 a

Mr. Paul Courtland Nuclear Regulatory Commission

> Engineering & General Communications Branch Office of Inspection and Enforcement Washington, D.C. 20555 5

Dear Paul:

?.9 y; '

, Reference, the two 15" x 15" x 1/2" carbon steel samples received 11/9/84 as shipped to me by Baldwin Associates, P.O. Box 306, Clinton, i(s W

Illinois 61727, and identified as 12949A and 12949B.

ip We have completely analyzed these two pieces and find the following:

Mechanical Properties iW ' -

Yield, psi Tensile, psi Elongation, 8" ET : 12949A 30,800 45,900 38%

32,400 44,000 38%

(@c S' 12949B 38,100 49,700 27.5%

38,400 48,500 24%

The two tests were run at 900 to each other and parallel to the cut P edges of the sample. A standard flat strap tensile test was used.

Chemistry

[ C Mn P S Si Cu Ni Cr Mo Al V Sn l

[M 12949A .01 .25 .012 .007 .0l* .03 .02 .01 .01 .007 .001* .008  !

gq ,

% 19249B .05 .47 .012 .013 .0l* .02 .01 .001 .01 .003 .001* .006 i b l O *less than

$N o

g' -

All of the above tests were run as standard producing mill results. No one was told that they were special.

i

'? Based on the results reported, the steel was not from the heat 81177-21 M sold to Interstate Steel. Also, the material was not produced by Phoenix Steel.

% This conclusion is based on certain elements in the chemical analysis being p much too low for a 100% scrap charge steelmaking shop, which Phoenix is. The R

in material that we tested was probably produced in a hot metal steel mill. f j

?M Go .

I 8412060316 841112 g o. t,, 10 h

T DR ADOCK 05000

_W 7*(o060

Mr. Paul Courtland Page Two November 12, 1984

)

It is also significant that none of the material met the ASTM A-36 specifications of 36,000 psi minimum yield and 58,000 to 80,000 psi tensile.

It is my conclusion, based on the two samples submitted, that Phoenix Steel is not at fault for the mixed steel. I await your comments.

Sincerely, PHOENIX STEEL CORPORATION Robert L. Brooks Manager, Quality Assurance RLB/vh