| Property | Parameter | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Product Name | Atmospheric Corrosion Resistant Steel Coil | Weathering steel coil with enhanced atmospheric corrosion resistance |
| Material Grade | ASTM A588 / A242 / SPA-H / 09CuPCrNi-A / S355J2WP | International grade equivalents for Corten-type steel |
| Standard Compliance | ASTM A588, ASTM A242, EN 10025-5, JIS G3125, GB/T 4171 | Meets major international weathering steel standards |
| Manufacturing Process | Hot Rolled | Produced via hot rolling process |
| Carbon (C) | ≤0.19% | Controlled carbon for weldability and toughness |
| Silicon (Si) | 0.30-0.65% | Enhances strength and oxidation resistance |
| Manganese (Mn) | 0.80-1.25% | Improves strength and hardenability |
| Phosphorus (P) | 0.01-0.04% | Contributes to atmospheric corrosion resistance |
| Copper (Cu) | 0.25-0.55% | Key element for protective patina formation |
| Chromium (Cr) | 0.40-0.70% | Enhances corrosion resistance and hardness |
| Nickel (Ni) | 0.10-0.40% | Improves toughness and corrosion resistance |
| Tensile Strength | ≥480 MPa | Minimum tensile strength per ASTM A588 |
| Yield Strength | ≥345 MPa | Minimum yield strength for structural use |
| Elongation | ≥21% | Ductility in 50mm gauge length |
| Thickness Range | 1.5 - 25 mm | Available coil thickness options |
| Width Range | 1000 - 2000 mm | Standard and custom widths available |
| Coil Weight | 5 - 30 tons | Typical coil weight range |
| Application | Bridges, containers, facades, transmission towers, railway vehicles | Outdoor structural and architectural applications |
| Certification | EN 10204 3.1, ISO 9001, Mill Test Certificate | Quality certifications provided |
| MOQ | 5 tons | Minimum order quantity |
Ordered 8 tons of A588 Gr.A atmospheric corrosion resistant steel coil at 3mm thickness for a municipal pedestrian bridge project in Ontario. The steel itself met mechanical requirements — tensile strength at 498 MPa, yield at 352 MPa — and the patina behaviour in our pre-installation exposure test looked normal. However, the initial shipment documents included a 3.2 certificate rather than the 3.1 format our project specification required, which held up our engineer's material sign-off by about one week. After escalating to the supplier's documentation team, the correct 3.1 certificate was issued within 48 hours. The issue appears to have been an administrative error rather than a quality problem, and the supplier handled the correction professionally. Material performance has been fine since installation. Would consider reordering if the documentation process is confirmed in advance.


