Comments on: Ask a Basher #1 http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/ask-a-basher-1_517.html Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:38:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Paul Desveaux http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/ask-a-basher-1_517.html/comment-page-1/#comment-62901 Paul Desveaux Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:25:36 +0000 http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/2006/12/28/ask-a-basher-1/#comment-62901 I recently recovered my roof (asphalt shingles) and I was unable to find a local tinsmith who would help me with flashing for the square aluminium chimney on the roof. I proceeded to cut and shape the flashing but the saddle or the piece of flashing which sits at the top or back of the chimney is presenting a greater challenge and I believe that unless the two corners are extended by welding additional pieces/wings to it, it will not devert rain water and melting snow away from the chimney as it should. Is it that difficult to weld the thin/soft metal used for flashing? Is there a special tool needed or a particular solder required? From what the locals tell me, it would seem to be the case. Can you tell me more? I recently recovered my roof (asphalt shingles) and I was unable to find a local tinsmith who would help me with flashing for the square aluminium chimney on the roof. I proceeded to cut and shape the flashing but the saddle or the piece of flashing which sits at the top or back of the chimney is presenting a greater challenge and I believe that unless the two corners are extended by welding additional pieces/wings to it, it will not devert rain water and melting snow away from the chimney as it should. Is it that difficult to weld the thin/soft metal used for flashing? Is there a special tool needed or a particular solder required? From what the locals tell me, it would seem to be the case. Can you tell me more?

]]> By: Paul Woodhouse http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/ask-a-basher-1_517.html/comment-page-1/#comment-61005 Paul Woodhouse Mon, 14 May 2007 23:19:35 +0000 http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/2006/12/28/ask-a-basher-1/#comment-61005 When I had a spell selling these in the UK I never recall being asked for a 'true' 45 degree elbow. M/M, M/F, F/F threaded or weldable elbows with regards to either metal or plastic I do remember, but true I don't know. Any help? When I had a spell selling these in the UK I never recall being asked for a ‘true’ 45 degree elbow. M/M, M/F, F/F threaded or weldable elbows with regards to either metal or plastic I do remember, but true I don’t know.

Any help?

]]> By: william mac phee http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/ask-a-basher-1_517.html/comment-page-1/#comment-61002 william mac phee Mon, 14 May 2007 23:07:16 +0000 http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/2006/12/28/ask-a-basher-1/#comment-61002 what is a true 45 degree elbow what is a true 45 degree elbow

]]> By: colin http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/ask-a-basher-1_517.html/comment-page-1/#comment-51029 colin Thu, 04 Jan 2007 22:30:19 +0000 http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/2006/12/28/ask-a-basher-1/#comment-51029 I have a hunch Santosh is in India. More bloody outsourcing. I have a hunch Santosh is in India. More bloody outsourcing.

]]> By: Steve Sawford http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/ask-a-basher-1_517.html/comment-page-1/#comment-50849 Steve Sawford Wed, 03 Jan 2007 14:44:37 +0000 http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/2006/12/28/ask-a-basher-1/#comment-50849 "I believe only the USA has the capabilities to make aluminum. The rest of the world is stuck with aluminium." Classic Danny :) “I believe only the USA has the capabilities to make aluminum. The rest of the world is stuck with aluminium.”

Classic Danny :)

]]> By: Paul Woodhouse http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/ask-a-basher-1_517.html/comment-page-1/#comment-50748 Paul Woodhouse Tue, 02 Jan 2007 15:47:44 +0000 http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/2006/12/28/ask-a-basher-1/#comment-50748 Absolutely splendid. Absolutely splendid.

]]> By: Danny Schaeffler, Engineering Quality Solutions http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/ask-a-basher-1_517.html/comment-page-1/#comment-50088 Danny Schaeffler, Engineering Quality Solutions Sat, 30 Dec 2006 02:24:45 +0000 http://www.butlersheetmetal.com/tinbasherblog/2006/12/28/ask-a-basher-1/#comment-50088 Multi-faceted question! First and foremost, aluminium in general and stainless steels in general are both capable of producing high quality sheet metal components. The forming process/die process chosen impacts the overall cost as well, along with part design and raw material cost. In the USA, the beverage can market is dominated by aluminum. (I believe only the USA has the capabilities to make aluminum. The rest of the world is stuck with aluminium.) The reason for this domination is that the aluminum industry did a much better marketing job than the steel industry. By having 100% of the cans made from the same aluminum grade, they can recycle cans with no problem. By contrast, there are cars with aluminum closure assemblies (like boot and bonnet [which are usually not on cars sold on this side of the pond]). The outer skin panel is made from one grade of aluminum (like 6111) while the underside unexposed inner panel is made from another grade (like 5182, if I remember the grade designation properly). When these assemblies are recycled, they need to be separated first and segregated. This is because the alloying elements of the 5xxx series are detrimental to the 6xxx series, and vice versa. But I digress… we’ve established that there is a single aluminum grade used for beverage cans in the USA. You have undoubtedly noticed that these are smooth cylindrical sides. But other aluminum cans like that used for canned veggies have ridges along the edge. Why? It all has to do with the modulus of aluminum being 1/3 that of steel. In carbonated beverages, the internal pressure of the bubblies is enough to keep the can straight. Unless you have “wee beasties,” this is not the case for canned food. So you need the ridges for stiffness. As for stainless steel, there are 2 primary series to consider - the 400 series (like 409 or 439 for example - used in auto exhaust systems, among other places) and the 300 series (like 304 or 316 - used in medical devices for example). The 300 series has inherently a greater formability than the 400 series. Why use 400-series then? Among other reasons, better high temperature properties. So for can-making, it's better to use the 300 series, right? I mean, for can making, isn't formability important? Of course it is, but I believe "cost" was mentioned in the question. The primary alloying element in 300-series stainless steels is nickel. Which seems to be daily increasing in price. What about low carbon steels for your beverage can application? This was a popular choice in the USA until the steel industry gave the aluminum industry an opening here, and the aluminum industry capitalized on it. There is some public domain information at http://www.steel.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Cans_and_Containers. Sorry about the long answer, but I didn’t have the time to write a short one. (I love that quote!) Best of luck! Cheers, Danny Multi-faceted question!
First and foremost, aluminium in general and stainless steels in general are both capable of producing high quality sheet metal components. The forming process/die process chosen impacts the overall cost as well, along with part design and raw material cost.

In the USA, the beverage can market is dominated by aluminum. (I believe only the USA has the capabilities to make aluminum. The rest of the world is stuck with aluminium.) The reason for this domination is that the aluminum industry did a much better marketing job than the steel industry. By having 100% of the cans made from the same aluminum grade, they can recycle cans with no problem. By contrast, there are cars with aluminum closure assemblies (like boot and bonnet [which are usually not on cars sold on this side of the pond]). The outer skin panel is made from one grade of aluminum (like 6111) while the underside unexposed inner panel is made from another grade (like 5182, if I remember the grade designation properly). When these assemblies are recycled, they need to be separated first and segregated. This is because the alloying elements of the 5xxx series are detrimental to the 6xxx series, and vice versa.
But I digress… we’ve established that there is a single aluminum grade used for beverage cans in the USA. You have undoubtedly noticed that these are smooth cylindrical sides. But other aluminum cans like that used for canned veggies have ridges along the edge. Why? It all has to do with the modulus of aluminum being 1/3 that of steel. In carbonated beverages, the internal pressure of the bubblies is enough to keep the can straight. Unless you have “wee beasties,” this is not the case for canned food. So you need the ridges for stiffness.

As for stainless steel, there are 2 primary series to consider – the 400 series (like 409 or 439 for example – used in auto exhaust systems, among other places) and the 300 series (like 304 or 316 – used in medical devices for example). The 300 series has inherently a greater formability than the 400 series. Why use 400-series then? Among other reasons, better high temperature properties. So for can-making, it’s better to use the 300 series, right? I mean, for can making, isn’t formability important? Of course it is, but I believe “cost” was mentioned in the question. The primary alloying element in 300-series stainless steels is nickel. Which seems to be daily increasing in price.

What about low carbon steels for your beverage can application? This was a popular choice in the USA until the steel industry gave the aluminum industry an opening here, and the aluminum industry capitalized on it. There is some public domain information at http://www.steel.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Cans_and_Containers.

Sorry about the long answer, but I didn’t have the time to write a short one. (I love that quote!)

Best of luck!

Cheers,
Danny

]]>