Advertisement

Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 49–65 | Cite as

Hot-dip galvanizing of cold-formed steel hollow sections: a state-of-the-art review

  • Min Sun
  • Jeffrey A. Packer
Review

Abstract

A good understanding of the effects of galvanizing on the short- and long-term behaviours of steel components is essential for structural design. This review paper is motivated by a series of recent reports on cracking in galvanized cold-formed tubular steel structures and the limitations of current steel product standards and steel design specifications in this field. The steel-related and galvanizing-related factors, different pre-galvanizing countermeasures for brittle cracking and the available technical documents are summarized. An extensive bibliography is provided as a basis for future research and development in this field.

Keywords

cold-formed steel hollow structural sections hot-dip galvanizing embrittlement heat-treatment residual stress cracking 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support from the Canadian Institute of Steel Construction (CISC) and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

References

  1. 1.
    AGA. Performance of hot-dip galvanized steel products in the atmosphere, soil, water, concrete and more. American Galvanizers Association, Centennial, USA, 2010Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    AGA. Hot-dip galvanizing for corrosion protection – a specifiers guide. American Galvanizers Association, Centennial, USA, 2006Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    BCSA/GA. Galvanizing structural steelwork – an approach to the management of liquid metal assisted cracking, 1st ed. British Constructional Steelwork Association, London, UK and Galvanizers Association, West Midlands, UK, 2005Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kinstler T J. Current knowledge of the cracking of steels during galvanizing – a synthesis of the available technical literature and collective experience for the American Institute of Steel Construction. GalvaScience LLC, Springville, USA, 2005Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ASTM. Standard practice for safeguarding against warpage and distortion during hot-dip galvanizing of steel assemblies, ASTM A384/A384M-07. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, USA, 2013Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    ASTM. Standard practice for safeguarding against embrittlement of hot-dip galvanized structural steel products and procedure for detecting embrittlement, ASTM A143/A143M-07. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, USA, 2014Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ASTM. Standard practice for providing high-quality zinc coating (hot-dip), ASTM A385/A385M-15. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, USA, 2015Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    AS/NZS. Hot-dip galvanized (zinc) coatings on fabricated ferrous articles, AS/NZS 4680:2006. Standards Australia, Sydney, Australia and Standards New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand, 2006Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    ISO. Zinc coating – guidelines and recommendations for the protection against corrosion of iron and steel in structures – part 2: hot dip galvanizing, ISO 14713-2:2009. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2009Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Foley C M, Ginal S J, Peronto J L, Fournelle R A. Structural analysis of sign bridge structures and luminaire supports.Wisconsin Department of Transportation Report No. 04-03. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,Marquette University, Milwaukee, USA, 2004Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Packer J A, Chiew S P, Tremblay R, Martinez-Saucedo G. Effect of material properties on hollow section performance. Structures and Buildings, 2010, 163(SB6): 375–390Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stem A, Richman N, Pool C, Rios C, Anderson T, Frank K. Fatigue life of steel base plate to pole connection for traffic structures. Texas Department of Transportation Report FHWA/TX-11/9-1526-1. Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, USA, 2011Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Goyal R, Dhonde H B, Dawood M. Fatigue failure and cracking in high mast poles. Texas Department of Transportation Report No. FHWA/TX-12/0-6650-1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, USA, 2012Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Foley C M, Diekfuss J A, Wan B. Fatigue risks in the connections of sign supporting structures. Wisconsin Department of Transportation Report No. WHRP 0092-09-07. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Marquette University, Milwaukee, USA, 2013Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ocel J M. Fatigue testing of galvanized and ungalvanized socket connections. Federal Highway Administration Report No. FHWAHRT-14-066. Federal Highway Administration, McLean, USA, 2014Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Feldmann M, Pinger T, Schafer D, Pope R, Smith W, Sedlacek G. Hot-dip-zinc-coating of prefabricated structural steel components, JRC Scientific and Technical Research Report No. 56810. European Commission Joint Research Centre, Luxembourg, 2010Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    ASTM. Standard specification for cold-formed welded carbon steel hollow structural sections (HSS), ASTM A1085/A1085M-15. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, USA, 2015Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vander Voort G F. Embrittlement of Steels. In: ASM Handbook, Volume 01- properties and selection: irons, steels, and highperformance alloys. Geauga County, USA: ASM International, 1990, 689–736Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Krauss G. Steels-processing, structure, and performance. 2nd ed. Geauga County, USA: ASM International, 2015Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cieslak M J. Cracking phenomena associated with welding. In: ASM Handbook, Volume 06- welding, brazing, and soldering. Geauga County, USA: ASM International, 1993, 88–96Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Smith R B. Arc welding of carbon steels. In: ASM Handbook, Volume 06–welding, brazing, and soldering. Geauga County, USA: ASM International, 1993, 641–661Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ikoma T, Kojima O, Hatakeyama K, Kanazawa S, Hiroki T, Iezawa T. Development of steel HT60 with low susceptibility to liquid zinc embrittlement for power transmission tower. Tetsu To Hagane, 1984, 7010: 1445–1451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Abe H, Iezawa T, Kanaya K, Yashamita T, Aihora S, Kanazawa S. Study of HAZ cracking of hot-dip galvanizing steel bridges, IIW Doc IX-1795-94. International Institute of Welding, Villepinte, France, 1994Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    JSA. High tensile strength steel for tower structural purposes, JIS G3129:2005. Japan Standards Association, Tokyo, Japan, 2005Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    ASTM. Standard specification for cold-formed welded and seamless carbon steel structural tubing in rounds and shapes, ASTM A500/ A500M-13. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, USA, 2013Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    CSA. General requirements for rolled or welded structural quality steel/structural quality steel, CAN/CSA-G40.20-13/G40.21-13. Canadian Standards Association, Toronto, Canada, 2013Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    CEN. Cold formed welded structural hollow sections of non-alloy and fine grain steels–part 1: technical delivery conditions, EN 10219-1:2006(E). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2006Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    JSA. Carbon steel square and rectangular tubes for general structure, JIS G3466:2015. Japan Standards Association, Tokyo, Japan, 2015Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    SAC. Cold forming steel sections, GB/T 6725-2008. Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, China, 2008Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    SAC. Cold formed steel hollow sections for general structure–dimensions, shapes, weight and permissible deviations, GB/T 6728-2002. Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, China, 2002Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    CEN. Cold formed welded structural hollow sections of non-alloy and fine grain steels–part 2: tolerances, dimensions and sectional properties, EN 10219-2:2006(E). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2006Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    SAC. Carbon structural steels, GB/T 700–2006. Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, China, 2006Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    SAC. Structural steel for bridge, GB/T 714–2015. Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, China, 2015Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    SAC. High strength low alloy structural steels, GB/T 1591–2008. Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, China, 2008Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    SAC. Cold rolled stainless steel plate, sheet and strip, GB/T 3280–2015. Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, China, 2015Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    SAC. Atmospheric corrosion resisting structural steel, GB/T 4171-2008. Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, China, 2008Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    AS/NZS. Cold-formed structural steel hollow sections, AS/NZS 1163:2016. Standards Australia, Sydney, Australia and Standards New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand, 2016Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Poag G, Zervoudis J. Influence of various parameters on steel cracking during galvanizing. In: Proceedings of AGA TechForum, Kansas, USA, 2003Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    CEN. Hot finished structural hollow sections of non-alloy and fine grain steels–part 1: technical delivery conditions, EN 10210-1:2006(E). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2006Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    CEN. Hot finished structural hollow sections of non-alloy and fine grain steels–part 2: tolerances, dimensions and sectional properties, EN 10210-1:2006(E). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2006Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    ASTM. Standard specification for hot-formed welded and seamless carbon steel structural tubing, ASTM A501/A501M-14. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, USA, 2014Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chajes A, Britvec S J, Winter G. Effects of cold-straining on structural sheet steels. Journal of the Structural Division. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, 1963, 892: 1–32Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Karren K W. Corner properties of cold-formed steel shapes. Journal of the Stuctural Division. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, 1967, 931: 401–432Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Karren K W, Winter G. Effects of cold-forming on light gage steel members. Journal of the Stuctural Division. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, 1967, 931: 433–469Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sun M, Packer J A. Direct forming versus continuous forming, for cold-formed square hollow sections. In: Proceedings of the 14th. International Symposium on Tubular Structures, London, UK, 2012, 739–746Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Davison T A, Birkemoe P C. Column behaviour of cold-formed hollow structural steel shapes. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 1983, 101: 125–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Key P W, Hasan S W, Hancock G J. Column behaviour of coldformed hollow sections. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1988, 1142: 390–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Zhao X L, Hancock G J. Square and rectangular hollow sections subject to combined actions. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1992, 1183: 648–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Key P W, Hancock G J. A theoretical investigation of the column behaviour of cold-formed square hollow sections. Thin-walled Structures, 1993, 161–4: 31–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Wilkinson T, Hancock G J. Tests for the compact web slenderness of cold-formed rectangular hollow sections, Research Report No. R744. University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, 1997Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Guo Y J, Zhu A Z, Pi Y L, Tin-Loi F. Experimental study on compressive strengths of thick-walled cold-formed sections. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2007, 635: 718–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gardner L, Saari N, Wang F. Comparative experimental study of hot-rolled and cold-formed rectangular hollow sections. Thinwalled Structures, 2010, 487: 495–507Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Tong L W, Hou G, Chen Y Y, Zhou F, Shen K, Yang A. Experimental investigation on longitudinal residual stresses for cold-formed thick-walled square hollow sections. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2012, 73: 105–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Sun M, Packer J A. Direct-formed and continuous-formed rectangular hollow sections–comparison of static properties. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2014, 92: 67–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sun M, Packer J A. Charpy V-notch impact toughness of coldformed rectangular hollow sections. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2014, 97: 114–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Sun M, Packer J A. High strain rate behaviour of cold-formed rectangular hollow sections. Engineering Structures, 2014, 62-63: 181–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Feldmann M, Eichler B, Kühn B, Stranghöner N, Dahl W, Langenberg P, Kouhi J, Pope R, Sedlacek G, Ritakallio P, Iglesias G, Puthli R S, Packer J A, Krampen J. Choice of steel material to avoid brittle fracture for hollow section structures, JRC Scientific and Policy Report No. 72702. European Commission Joint Research Centre, Luxembourg, 2012Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sedlacek G, Feldmann M, Kühn B, Tschickardt D, Höhler S, Müller C, Hensen W, Stranghöner N, Dahl W, Langenberg P, Münstermann S, Brozetti J, Raoul J, Pope R, Bijlaard F. Commentary and worked examples to EN 1993-1-10 “Material toughness and through thickness properties” and other toughness oriented rules in EN 1993, JRC Scientific and Policy Report No. 47278. European Commission Joint Research Centre, Luxembourg, 2008Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    ISO. Static design procedure for welded hollow-section joints–recommendations, ISO 14346: 2013. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2013Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    CECS. Technical specification for structures with steel hollow sections, CECS 280:2010. China Association for Engineering Construction Standardization, Beijing, China, 2010Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    ASTM. Standard test methods and definitions for mechanical testing of steel products, ASTM A370-17. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, USA, 2017Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Packer J A, Frater G S. Recommended effective throat sizes for flare groove welds to HSS. Engineering Journal (New York), 2005, 421: 31–44Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    SAC. Metallic coatings–hot dip galvanized coatings on fabricated iron and steel articles–specifications and test methods, GB/T 13912-2002. Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, China, 2002Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Somodi B, Kovesdi B. Residual stress measurements on coldformed HSS hollow section columns. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2017, 128: 706–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Chiew S P. Assessment of BS EN10219 200 × 200mm SHS with corner surface defects. Technical Report, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, 2007Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Kikuchi M, Iezawa T. Effect of stress-concentration on liquid metal embrittlement cracking of steel by molten zinc. Journal of the Society of Materials Science, Japan, 1982, 31342: 271–276Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Kominami Y, Yano K, Ishimoto K, Terasaki T, Mukae S. Thermal stress of plate and pipe occurred during dipping in the molten zinc bath–liquid metal embrittlement of welded joint of steel during hot dip galvanizing (report 2). Quarterly Journal of the Japan Welding Society, 1985, 32: 347–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zervoudis J, Anderson G. A review of bath alloy additives and their impact on the quality of the galvanized coating. In: Proceedings of the 6th. Asia Pacific General Galvanizing Conference, Cairns, Australia, 2005Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Gagne M. Industrial testing of zinc-bismuth alloys for afterfabrication hot dip galvanizing. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Galvanizing Conference, Birmingham, UK, 1997Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Gilles M, Sokolowski R. The zinc-tin galvanizing alloy: a unique zinc alloy for galvanizing any reactive steel grade. In: Proceedings of the 18th. International Galvanizing Conference, Birmingham, UK, 1997Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Pankert R, Dhaussy D, Beguin P, Gilles M. Three years industrial experience with the galveco alloy. In: Proceedings of the 20th. International Galvanizing Conference, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2003Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kosteski N, Packer J A, Puthli R S. Notch toughness of internationally produced hollow structural sections. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2005, 1312: 279–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Mori M, Nakagomi T, Suzuki I, Kim C. Proposal of prevention method on cracks at hot-dipped galvanization of rectangular hollow section steel pipes by cold forming. Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, 2009, 74638: 739–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Abe K. Countermeasures for steel structure brittle cracking caused by hot dip galvanizing. In: Seminar on Design of Steel Structures–Structural Hollow Sections, Department of Civil Engineering, the University of Hong Kong, China, 2011Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations