CSA G164 PDF
Buy CSA G HOT DIP GALVANIZING OF IRREGULARLY SHAPED ARTICLES from SAI Global. Buy CSA G Hot Dip Galvanizing Of Irregularly Shaped Articles from SAI Global. All about CSA CAN/CSA-GM92 – Hot Dip Galvanizing of Irregularly Shaped Articles by Canadian Standards Association. LibraryThing is a cataloging and.
|Published (Last):||6 September 2007|
|PDF File Size:||8.10 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||14.23 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Is CSA G still a valid specification? However, there are some competing specifications that get attention when an end user asks a galvanizer to use them. While this standard is similar to ASTM A in scope and purpose, there are many differences between the two. The scope of these two specifications, and therefore their intended purpose, are nearly identical.
Some slightly different language exists between the two regarding piping and continuous galvanizing, but when read carefully, the same information is being stated in the scope of each specification. This leads to less confusion during the galvanizing process and creates a complete specification.
Differences Between ASTM A and… | American Galvanizer’s Association
The first major difference between the two specifications comes when section 3. The higher purity required by G creates the difference in the two specifications. Both standards also cite ASTM B6 as a standard to which the zinc used in the galvanizing bath must conform. The two specifications also contain a minor difference regarding the renovation of areas left uncoated dsa the galvanizing process.
Both specifications also require the bare spot to be less than 0. ASTM A is listed as the standard for renovation by each specification.
Differences Between ASTM A123 and CSA G164
ASTM 1g64 also declares, in addition to the 0. Each specification standardizes the coating thicknessfinish, appearance, cda adherence of a hot-dip galvanized coating. Again, these two specifications are similar, but have some very important differences; especially in regards to the specified coating properties. For, example, each specification uses a table to describe minimum coating thickness standards on galvanized steel, but the minimum requirements and materials listed are quite different.
Table 1 of ASTM A has requirements for structural shapes, strip and bar, plate, pipe and tubing, wire, and reinforcing bar.
Also, A does not give requirements for the minimum coating thickness on fasteners and threaded articles but references ASTM A for these requirements. Both tables are shown below to compare the minimum 1g64 thicknesses specified by each one. The most notable difference here is in regard to the minimum coating thickness required by A vsa pipe and tubing as well as for strip and bar.
Recent information has shown coatings much thicker than these minimum requirements are not attainable on these materials.
Despite this, G lumps this material in with all other materials and requires unattainable thicknesses for strip, bar, pipe, and tubing.
Csaa practice behind each one of these methods varies csw one specification to the next, but the most notable differences are that of the magnetic and electronic thickness gauge measurements.
A, on the other hand, only requires the average coating thickness measurement meet the minimum coating thickness required by Table 1, with the average of one specimen being one coating grade below that required in Table 1.
Standards Council of Canada
The sampling procedure laid out in G for testing the coating thickness has some very general and relaxed guidelines. Few requirements are given by G concerning the sca of the zinc coating. ASTM A also holds a few more requirements regarding the finish of the coating.
Both specifications ask for the csaa of a stout knife test to determine proper adherence of the coating. However, G gives its own procedures for testing for css of the base coating while A references a complete guide of ASTM A which details a bend test. New information and research are constantly being considered when updates are made to ASTM A; the last such update occurring in It is considered the standard of the hot-dip galvanizing industry in North America.
Standards – Locweld
But due to financial considerations, CSA G has not been updated since and there seem to be no plans to do so. It has lost relevancy in the market and is seldom used. However, the information presented here may adequately describe some of the caa differences between the two. The material provided herein has been developed to provide accurate and authoritative information about after-fabrication hot-dip galvanized steel. This material provides general information only and is not intended as a substitute for competent professional examination and verification as to suitability and applicability.
The information provided herein is not intended as a gg164 or warranty on the part of the Caa. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability arising from such use. January 29, Authored by Daniel Barlow.